[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <f64f960b-d978-4022-9e56-0d9d9a3c0ebc@www.fastmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 09:30:31 -0700
From: "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@...nel.org>
To: "Jann Horn" <jannh@...gle.com>, "Andrei Vagin" <avagin@...il.com>
Cc: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Linux API" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, criu@...nvz.org, avagin@...gle.com,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Anton Ivanov" <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
"Christian Brauner" <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
"Dmitry Safonov" <0x7f454c46@...il.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>, "Jeff Dike" <jdike@...toit.com>,
"Mike Rapoport" <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
"Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Richard Weinberger" <richard@....at>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] arch/x86: implement the process_vm_exec syscall
On Mon, Jun 28, 2021, at 9:13 AM, Jann Horn wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 7:59 AM Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com> wrote:
> > This change introduces the new system call:
> > process_vm_exec(pid_t pid, struct sigcontext *uctx, unsigned long flags,
> > siginfo_t * uinfo, sigset_t *sigmask, size_t sizemask)
> >
> > process_vm_exec allows to execute the current process in an address
> > space of another process.
> [...]
>
> I still think that this whole API is fundamentally the wrong approach
> because it tries to shoehorn multiple usecases with different
> requirements into a single API. But that aside:
>
> > +static void swap_mm(struct mm_struct *prev_mm, struct mm_struct *target_mm)
> > +{
> > + struct task_struct *tsk = current;
> > + struct mm_struct *active_mm;
> > +
> > + task_lock(tsk);
> > + /* Hold off tlb flush IPIs while switching mm's */
> > + local_irq_disable();
> > +
> > + sync_mm_rss(prev_mm);
> > +
> > + vmacache_flush(tsk);
> > +
> > + active_mm = tsk->active_mm;
> > + if (active_mm != target_mm) {
> > + mmgrab(target_mm);
> > + tsk->active_mm = target_mm;
> > + }
> > + tsk->mm = target_mm;
>
> I'm pretty sure you're not currently allowed to overwrite the ->mm
> pointer of a userspace thread. For example, zap_threads() assumes that
> all threads running under a process have the same ->mm. (And if you're
> fiddling with ->mm stuff, you should probably CC linux-mm@.)
exec_mmap() does it, so it can’t be entirely impossible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists