linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: avoid corrupting page->mapping in hugetlb_mcopy_atomic

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]

Date:   Fri, 15 Jul 2022 10:29:33 -0700
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc:     Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
        Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: avoid corrupting page->mapping in
 hugetlb_mcopy_atomic_pte

On 07/15/22 13:07, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 09:45:37AM -0700, Axel Rasmussen wrote:
> > I don't really have a strong preference between the two. The second option
> > is what I originally proposed in the first version of the minor fault
> > series, so going back to that isn't a problem at least from my perspective.
> > If in the future we find a real use case for this, we could always easily
> > re-enable it and add selftests for it at that point.
> 
> I'd go for fixing the test case if possible.  Mike, would it be fine if we
> go back to /dev/hugepages path based approach in the test case?
> 

No problem going back to using a file for private mapping testing.  Removing
that was more of a simplification, because of new MADV_DONTNEED support.
Just want to make sure we also keep remap and remove event testing.
-- 
Mike Kravetz