linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: Re-allow pinning of zero pfns

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 28 Jul 2022 11:23:33 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc:     Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, minchan@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...nel.org,
        jhubbard@...dia.com, joaodias@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Re-allow pinning of zero pfns

On 28.07.22 10:45, Alistair Popple wrote:
> 
> Looks like the original patch might need rebasing. I am about to post a
> clean-up for the tortured logic in check_and_migrate_movable_pages() so
> can incorporate it there, but I'm wondering what the consensus was for
> pinning of zero pfn?

We have to keep it working right now, but in most cases (inside
MAP_PRIVATE regions) it's shaky and undesired.

> 
> Currently my clean-up will result in PUP returning an error for the zero
> pfn rather than looping indefinitely in the kernel. However it wasn't
> clear from this thread if returning an error is ok, or if R/O pinning
> of the zero pfn should succeed?

I'm working on proper COW breaking in MAP_PRIVATE mappings, which will,
for example, unshare the shared zeropage and properly replace it by
exclusive anon pages first in the FOLL_LONGTERM case.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb