[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YehilqRvYLhryUk4@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:12:22 +0000
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Alexey Klimov <aklimov@...hat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmap(): don't allow invalid pages
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 06:43:10PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Indeed, my impression is that the only legitimate way to get hold of a page
> pointer without assumed provenance is via pfn_to_page(), which is where
> pfn_valid() comes in. Thus pfn_valid(page_to_pfn()) really *should* be a
> tautology.
That can only be true if pfn == page_to_pfn(pfn_to_page(pfn)) for all
values of pfn.
Given how pfn_to_page() is defined in the sparsemem case:
#define __pfn_to_page(pfn) \
({ unsigned long __pfn = (pfn); \
struct mem_section *__sec = __pfn_to_section(__pfn); \
__section_mem_map_addr(__sec) + __pfn; \
})
#define page_to_pfn __page_to_pfn
that isn't the case, especially when looking at page_to_pfn():
#define __page_to_pfn(pg) \
({ const struct page *__pg = (pg); \
int __sec = page_to_section(__pg); \
(unsigned long)(__pg - __section_mem_map_addr(__nr_to_section(__sec))); \
})
Where:
static inline unsigned long page_to_section(const struct page *page)
{
return (page->flags >> SECTIONS_PGSHIFT) & SECTIONS_MASK;
}
So if page_to_section() returns something that is, e.g. zero for an
invalid page in a non-zero section, you're not going to end up with
the right pfn from page_to_pfn().
As I've said now a couple of times, trying to determine of a struct
page pointer is valid is the wrong question to be asking.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists