linux-kernel - [RFC 03/11] mm/mmap/vma_merge: use the proper vma pointer in case 3

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: <20230224100022.11268-4-vbabka@suse.cz>
Date:   Fri, 24 Feb 2023 11:00:14 +0100
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:     linux-mm@...ck.org, "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: [RFC 03/11] mm/mmap/vma_merge: use the proper vma pointer in case 3

In case 3 we we use 'next' for everything but vma_pgoff. So use 'next'
for that as well, instead of 'mid', for consistency. Then in case 8 we
have to use 'mid' explicitly, which should also make the intent more
obvious.

Adjust the diagram for cases 1-3 in the comment to match the code - we
are using 'next' for case 3 so mark the range with XXXX instead of NNNN.
For case 2 that's a no-op as the code doesn't touch 'next' or 'mid'. For
case 1 it's now wrong but that will be fixed next.

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
---
 mm/mmap.c | 9 +++++----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
index 0a8b052e3022..1af4c9bc2c87 100644
--- a/mm/mmap.c
+++ b/mm/mmap.c
@@ -857,11 +857,11 @@ can_vma_merge_after(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long vm_flags,
  *    mmap, brk or    case 4 below       case 5 below
  *    mremap move:
  *                        AAAA               AAAA
- *                    PPPP    NNNN       PPPPNNNNXXXX
+ *                    PPPP    XXXX       PPPPNNNNXXXX
  *                    might become       might become
  *                    PPPPPPPPPPPP 1 or  PPPPPPPPPPPP 6 or
- *                    PPPPPPPPNNNN 2 or  PPPPPPPPXXXX 7 or
- *                    PPPPNNNNNNNN 3     PPPPXXXXXXXX 8
+ *                    PPPPPPPPXXXX 2 or  PPPPPPPPXXXX 7 or
+ *                    PPPPXXXXXXXX 3     PPPPXXXXXXXX 8
  *
  * It is important for case 8 that the vma NNNN overlapping the
  * region AAAA is never going to extended over XXXX. Instead XXXX must
@@ -978,9 +978,10 @@ struct vm_area_struct *vma_merge(struct vma_iterator *vmi, struct mm_struct *mm,
 			vma = next;			/* case 3 */
 			vma_start = addr;
 			vma_end = next->vm_end;
-			vma_pgoff = mid->vm_pgoff;
+			vma_pgoff = next->vm_pgoff;
 			err = 0;
 			if (mid != next) {		/* case 8 */
+				vma_pgoff = mid->vm_pgoff;
 				remove = mid;
 				err = dup_anon_vma(next, mid);
 			}
-- 
2.39.2