linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v29 00/20] Intel SGX foundations

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]

Message-ID: <20200528111507.GA1666298@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 May 2020 14:15:07 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc:     Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        dave.hansen@...el.com, Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>,
        "Huang, Haitao" <haitao.huang@...el.com>,
        andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        "Svahn, Kai" <kai.svahn@...el.com>, bp@...en8.de,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, luto@...nel.org,
        kai.huang@...el.com, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        "Xing, Cedric" <cedric.xing@...el.com>,
        Patrick Uiterwijk <puiterwijk@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v29 00/20] Intel SGX foundations

On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 05:25:55PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Ah, fudge.  shmem_zero_setup() triggers shmem_acct_size() and thus
> __vm_enough_memory().  Which I should have rememered because I've stared
> at that code several times when dealing with the enclave's backing store.
> I wasn't seeing the issue because I happened to use MAP_PRIVATE.
> 
> So, bad analysis, good conclusion, i.e. the kernel is still doing the
> right thing, it's just not ideal for userspace.
> 
> 
> Jarkko, we should update the docs and selftest to recommend and use
> 
>   PROT_NONE, MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS
> 
> or
> 
>   PROT_NONE, MAP_SHARED | MAP_NORESERVE | MAP_ANONYMOUS"
> 
> when carving out ELRANGE, with an explicit comment that all the normal
> rules for mapping memory still apply.

Ugh, had forgotten this.

OK, I guess this comment explains it all:

"
/*
 * shmem_file_setup pre-accounts the whole fixed size of a VM object,
 * for shared memory and for shared anonymous (/dev/zero) mappings
 * (unless MAP_NORESERVE and sysctl_overcommit_memory <= 1),
 * consistent with the pre-accounting of private mappings ...
 */
static inline int shmem_acct_size(unsigned long flags, loff_t size)
"

/Jarkko