linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] mm/gup: introduce pin_user

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: <a47eef63-0f29-2185-f044-854ffaefae9c@nvidia.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Aug 2022 12:33:13 -0700
From:   John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
        Anna Schumaker <anna@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] mm/gup: introduce pin_user_page()

On 8/29/22 05:07, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> +/**
>> + * pin_user_page() - apply a FOLL_PIN reference to a page
>> + *
>> + * @page: the page to be pinned.
>> + *
>> + * This is similar to get_user_pages(), except that the page's refcount is
>> + * elevated using FOLL_PIN, instead of FOLL_GET.

Actually, my commit log has a more useful documentation of this routine,
and given the questions below, I think I'll change to that:

 * pin_user_page() is an externally-usable version of try_grab_page(), but with
 * semantics that match get_page(), so that it can act as a drop-in replacement
 * for get_page().
 *
 * pin_user_page() elevates a page's refcount using FOLL_PIN rules. This means
 * that the caller must release the page via unpin_user_page().

>> + *
>> + * IMPORTANT: The caller must release the page via unpin_user_page().
>> + *
>> + */
>> +void pin_user_page(struct page *page)
>> +{
>> +	struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
>> +
>> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_ref_count(folio) <= 0);
>> +
> 
> We should warn if the page is anon and !exclusive.

That would be sort of OK, because pin_user_page() is being created
specifically for file system (O_DIRECT cases) use, and so the pages
should mostly be file-backed, rather than anon. Although I'm a little
vague about whether all of these iov_iter cases are really always
file-backed pages, especially for cases such as splice(2) to an
O_DIRECT-opened file, that Al Viro mentioned [1].

Can you walk me through the reasoning for why we need to keep out
anon shared pages? 

> 
> I assume the intend is to use pin_user_page() only to duplicate pins, right?
> 

Well, yes or no, depending on your use of the term "pin":

pin_user_page() is used on a page that already has a refcount >= 1 (so
no worries about speculative pinning should apply here), but the page
does not necessarily have any FOLL_PIN's applied to it yet (so it's not
"pinned" in the FOLL_PIN sense).

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Ywq5VrSrY341UVpL@ZenIV/

thanks,

-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA