[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210409144909.3488db39@alex-virtual-machine>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2021 14:49:09 +0800
From: Aili Yao <yaoaili@...gsoft.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"HORIGUCHI NAOYA( 堀口 直也)"
<naoya.horiguchi@....com>, <yaoaili@...gsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] Fix machine check recovery for copy_from_user
On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 14:39:09 +0000
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com> wrote:
> > I have one scenario, may you take into account:
> >
> > If one copyin case occurs, write() returned by your patch, the user process may
> > check the return values, for errors, it may exit the process, then the error page
> > will be freed, and then the page maybe alloced to other process or to kernel itself,
> > then code will initialize it and this will trigger one SRAO, if it's used by kernel,
> > we may do nothing for this, and kernel may still touch it, and lead to one panic.
>
> In this case kill_me_never() calls memory_failure() with flags == 0. I think (hope!)
> that means that it will unmap the page from the task, but will not send a signal.
>
> When the task exits the PTE for this page has the swap/poison signature, so the
> page is not freed for re-use.
>
> -Tony
Oh, Yes, Sorry for my rudeness and error-understandings, I just happen to can't control my emotions and get confused for some other things.
Thanks!
Aili Yao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists