[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <268b3146-2963-15b6-6d6-95a96853314@google.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2022 19:40:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Herbert.van.den.Bergh@...cle.com,
chris.mason@...cle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mlock: fix potential imbalanced rlimit ucounts
adjustment
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022, Miaohe Lin wrote:
> user_shm_lock forgets to set allowed to 0 when get_ucounts fails. So
> the later user_shm_unlock might do the extra dec_rlimit_ucounts. Fix
> this by resetting allowed to 0.
>
> Fixes: 5ed44a401ddf ("do not limit locked memory when RLIMIT_MEMLOCK is RLIM_INFINITY")
> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
NAK. user_shm_lock() remembers to declare "int allowed = 0" on entry.
> ---
> mm/mlock.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mlock.c b/mm/mlock.c
> index 29372c0eebe5..efd2dd2943de 100644
> --- a/mm/mlock.c
> +++ b/mm/mlock.c
> @@ -733,6 +733,7 @@ int user_shm_lock(size_t size, struct ucounts *ucounts)
> }
> if (!get_ucounts(ucounts)) {
> dec_rlimit_ucounts(ucounts, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, locked);
> + allowed = 0;
> goto out;
> }
> allowed = 1;
> --
> 2.23.0
>
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists