linux-kernel - Re: Sealed memfd & no-fault mmap

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: <CAHk-=whce3vmj+g7jcE0rasoDavJutxno3ZZrvvWYQywWXH31Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 31 May 2021 20:24:07 -1000
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Ming Lin <minggr@...il.com>
Cc:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Simon Ser <contact@...rsion.fr>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@...ah.com>,
        "tytso@....edu" <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: Sealed memfd & no-fault mmap

On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 11:13 AM Ming Lin <minggr@...il.com> wrote:
>
> OK, I borrowed code from filemap_xip.c and implemented this behavior.

I think that "unmap page" is too complicated and fragile.

The only page that could possibly validly be unmapped is a stale zero
page, but that code in shmem_unmap_nofault_page() seems to try to
handle other cases too (ie that whole page_remove_rmap() - afaik a
zero page has no rmap).

I get the feeling that the simpler thing to do is to just say "if you
use MAP_NOSIGBUS, and you access pages that don't have a backing
store, you will get zero pages, and they will NOT BE SYNCHRONIZED with
the backing store possibly later being updated".

IOW, just document the fact that a MAP_NOSIGBUS mapping isn't coherent
wrt shmem contents that are expanded and filled in later.

Don't try to "fix" it - because any user that uses MAP_NOSIGBUS had
better just accept that it's not compatible with expanding the shmem
backing store later.

Keep it simple and stupid. Hmm?

                  Linus