[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YSk+9cTMYi2+BFW7@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 19:37:25 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
cluster-devel <cluster-devel@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 05/19] iov_iter: Introduce fault_in_iov_iter_writeable
On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:33:00PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:23 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Could you show the cases where "partial copy, so it's OK" behaviour would
> > break anything?
>
> Absolutely.
>
> For example, i t would cause an infinite loop in
> restore_fpregs_from_user() if the "buf" argument is a situation where
> the first page is fine, but the next page is not.
>
> Why? Because __restore_fpregs_from_user() would take a fault, but then
> fault_in_pages_readable() (renamed) would succeed, so you'd just do
> that "retry" forever and ever.
>
> Probably there are a number of other places too. That was literally
> the *first* place I looked at.
OK...
Let me dig out the notes from the last time I looked through that area
and grep around a bit. Should be about an hour or two.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists