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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 2 Mar 2020 15:07:31 -0500
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Martin Cracauer <cracauer@...s.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>,
        Bobby Powers <bobbypowers@...il.com>,
        Maya Gokhale <gokhale2@...l.gov>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Marty McFadden <mcfadden8@...l.gov>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Brian Geffon <bgeffon@...gle.com>,
        Denis Plotnikov <dplotnikov@...tuozzo.com>,
        Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...tuozzo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v6 02/16] mm/gup: Fix __get_user_pages() on fault
 retry of hugetlb

On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 08:02:34PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 20.02.20 16:53, Peter Xu wrote:
> > When follow_hugetlb_page() returns with *locked==0, it means we've got
> > a VM_FAULT_RETRY within the fauling process and we've released the
> > mmap_sem.  When that happens, we should stop and bail out.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/gup.c | 10 ++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> > index 1b4411bd0042..76cb420c0fb7 100644
> > --- a/mm/gup.c
> > +++ b/mm/gup.c
> > @@ -849,6 +849,16 @@ static long __get_user_pages(struct task_struct *tsk, struct mm_struct *mm,
> >  				i = follow_hugetlb_page(mm, vma, pages, vmas,
> >  						&start, &nr_pages, i,
> >  						gup_flags, locked);
> > +				if (locked && *locked == 0) {
> > +					/*
> > +					 * We've got a VM_FAULT_RETRY
> > +					 * and we've lost mmap_sem.
> > +					 * We must stop here.
> > +					 */
> > +					BUG_ON(gup_flags & FOLL_NOWAIT);
> > +					BUG_ON(ret != 0);
> 
> Can we be sure ret is really set to != 0 at this point? At least,
> reading the code this is not clear to me.

Here I wanted to make sure ret is zero (it's BUG_ON, not assert).

"ret" is the fallback return value only if error happens when i==0.
Here we want to make sure even if no page is pinned we'll return zero
gracefully when VM_FAULT_RETRY happened when following the hugetlb
pages.

> 
> Shouldn't we set "ret = i" and assert that i is an error (e.g., EBUSY?).
> Or set -EBUSY explicitly?

No.  Here "i" could only be either positive (when we've got some pages
pinned no matter where), or zero (when follow_hugetlb_page released
the mmap_sem on the first page that it wants to pin).  So imo "i"
should never be negative instead.

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu

Powered by blists - more mailing lists