linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v1 1/2] mm/gup: fixup for 9947ea2c1e608e32 "mm/gup: track FOLL

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 29 Feb 2020 11:51:19 +0100
From:   Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
Cc:     <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <borntraeger@...ibm.com>, <david@...hat.com>,
        <aarcange@...hat.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>, <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 1/2] mm/gup: fixup for 9947ea2c1e608e32 "mm/gup: track
 FOLL_PIN pages"

On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:08:35 -0800
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com> wrote:

> On 2/28/20 7:43 AM, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> > In case pin fails, we need to unpin, a simple put_page will not be
> > enough
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/gup.c | 5 ++++-
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> > index f589299b0d4a..0b9a806898f3 100644
> > --- a/mm/gup.c
> > +++ b/mm/gup.c
> > @@ -2134,7 +2134,10 @@ static int gup_pte_range(pmd_t pmd, unsigned
> > long addr, unsigned long end, goto pte_unmap;
> >  
> >  		if (unlikely(pte_val(pte) != pte_val(*ptep))) {
> > -			put_page(head);
> > +			if (flags & FOLL_GET)
> > +				put_page(head);
> > +			else if (flags & FOLL_PIN)
> > +				unpin_user_page(head);  
> 
> Hi Claudio,
> 
> Instead, I think that should actually be:
> 
> 		put_compound_head(page, 1, flags);

that makes sense, yes :)

I'll fix it in the next iteration

> 
> which does a bit more (bug checks and /proc/vmstat instrumentation)
> than your diff, but has the same basic idea: call the right "put"
> function.  
> 
> ...oh, actually, I see you have the commit hash in the subject line.
> Instead, it should be in the commit description. Let's maybe change
> the subject line to approx:
> 
>     mm/gup: Fix a missing put_compound_head() call in gup_pte_range()
> 
> And the write up...how about something like this, if you like it:
> 
> 
> try_grab_compound_head() must be undone via put_compound_head(), not
> put_page(). This was missed in the original implementation of the
> gup/dma tracking patch, so fix it now.
> 
> Fixes: 0ea2781c3de4 ("mm/gup: track FOLL_PIN pages")
> 
> 
>     
> (Aside: I'm using the linux-next commit hash. How does one get the
> correct hash before it goes to mainline? I guess maintainer scripts
> fix all those up?)

my idea was that my patch should be used as fix-up, so the actual
content of the commit message is not relevant

> It's also good to Cc some reviewers in case I'm overlooking
> something, so I'm adding Jan and Kirill.
> 
> thanks,