linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH RESEND 15/28] mm/mmap: mark adjacent VMAs as locked if they can grow into unmapped area

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, 9 Sep 2022 09:25:08 -0700
From:   Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
To:     Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, michel@...pinasse.org,
        jglisse@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
        hannes@...xchg.org, mgorman@...e.de, dave@...olabs.net,
        willy@...radead.org, liam.howlett@...cle.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        laurent.dufour@...ibm.com, paulmck@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org,
        songliubraving@...com, peterx@...hat.com, david@...hat.com,
        dhowells@...hat.com, hughd@...gle.com, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
        kent.overstreet@...ux.dev, rientjes@...gle.com,
        axelrasmussen@...gle.com, joelaf@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com,
        kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH RESEND 15/28] mm/mmap: mark adjacent VMAs as locked if
 they can grow into unmapped area

On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 6:43 AM Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Le 01/09/2022 à 19:35, Suren Baghdasaryan a écrit :
> > While unmapping VMAs, adjacent VMAs might be able to grow into the area
> > being unmapped. In such cases mark adjacent VMAs as locked to prevent
> > this growth.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/mmap.c | 8 ++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
> > index b0d78bdc0de0..b31cc97c2803 100644
> > --- a/mm/mmap.c
> > +++ b/mm/mmap.c
> > @@ -2680,10 +2680,14 @@ detach_vmas_to_be_unmapped(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> >        * VM_GROWSUP VMA. Such VMAs can change their size under
> >        * down_read(mmap_lock) and collide with the VMA we are about to unmap.
> >        */
> > -     if (vma && (vma->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN))
> > +     if (vma && (vma->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN)) {
> > +             vma_mark_locked(vma);
> >               return false;
> > -     if (prev && (prev->vm_flags & VM_GROWSUP))
> > +     }
> > +     if (prev && (prev->vm_flags & VM_GROWSUP)) {
> > +             vma_mark_locked(prev);
> >               return false;
> > +     }
> >       return true;
> >  }
> >
>
> That looks right to be.
>
> But, in addition to that, like the previous patch, all the VMAs to be
> detached from the tree in the loop above, should be marked locked just
> before calling vm_rb_erase().

The following call chain already locks the VMA being isolated:
vma_rb_erase->vma_rb_erase_ignore->__vma_rb_erase->vma_mark_locked