linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: Fix invalid page pointer returned with FOLL

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: <YfOKHMbk2caH4d5g@xz-m1.local>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:15:56 +0800
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
Cc:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Fix invalid page pointer returned with FOLL_PIN gups

On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 09:57:34PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 1/27/22 19:26, Peter Xu wrote:
> ...
> > I see that both you and John has a strong preference on at least the
> > WARN_ON_ONCE() in the patch.
> > 
> > Do you think it's okay I repost with only the one-liner fix, which will keep
> > the Fixes but drop the WARN_ON_ONCE?  Then we can leave the rest as follow up.
> > 
> 
> I think that's OK with me, anyway. You'll recall that I initially requested
> that you split this into two patches, after all.
> 
> Would you like me to post a follow-up that does the refactoring that Jason
> and I are requesting? I see that we have some fundamental differences in
> opinion about how this should be done, so rather than drive you crazy with
> debating, maybe that would be smoother?  :)

Sure thing. :-)

Please just double check that the pud devmap will still always work on mlock().
I believe both of you are much more familiar than me on that; it just still
seems a little bit tricky.

I'll repost this one, thanks.

-- 
Peter Xu