linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH 0/5] madvise MADV

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: <5f898e84d66a46b891e75e7c861e03a1@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Aug 2021 08:07:42 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     "'Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.)'" 
        <longpeng2@...wei.com>, 'Khalid Aziz' <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox" <willy@...radead.org>
CC:     Steven Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>,
        Anthony Yznaga <anthony.yznaga@...cle.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "Gonglei (Arei)" <arei.gonglei@...wei.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 0/5] madvise MADV_DOEXEC

From: Longpeng
> Sent: 16 August 2021 01:26
> Hi David,
> 
> 在 2021/8/15 4:07, David Laight 写道:
> > ...
> >>>>> Let me describe my use case more clearly (just ignore if you're not
> >>>>> interested in it):
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. Prog A mmap() 4GB memory (anon or file-mapping), suppose the
> >>>>> allocated VA range is [0x40000000,0x140000000)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. Prog A specifies [0x48000000,0x50000000) and
> >>>>> [0x80000000,0x100000000) will be shared by its child.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 3. Prog A fork() Prog B and then Prog B exec() a new ELF binary.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 4. Prog B notice the shared ranges (e.g. by input parameters or
> >>>>> ...)
> >>>>> and remap them to a continuous VA range.
> >
> > Remapping to contiguous VA is going to be difficult in the
> > general case for (IIRC) VIVT caches.
> > The required cache coherence may only be attainable by
> > using uncached mappings.
> >
> 
> The Prog B uses mremap() syscall to remapping the shared ranges to other places,
> this is a common case for mremap in userspace.
> The cache coherence should already be processed in mremap core logic, otherwise
> there's maybe something wrong in mremap().

Maybe it does, and probably mremap() makes it work.
But with VIVT caches if a pages gets mapped in two processes
at the same time at different offsets into the cache then
then both mappings end up being uncached.
This was always a problem with normal file mmap.
I don't know if Linux manages to pick the VA after finding the
page has another mapping - SVR4 didn't.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)