[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7161f75e-9f40-f881-84b8-1eaaec0b0e3f@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 15:07:26 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ux.ibm.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: fix mmap_lock bad unlock
On 06.03.23 14:55, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> When page fault is tried holding the per VMA lock, bad_access_pkey() and
> bad_access() should not be called because it is assuming the mmap_lock is
> held.
> In the case a bad access is detected, fall back to the default path,
> grabbing the mmap_lock to handle the fault and report the error.
>
> Fixes: 169db3bb4609 ("powerc/mm: try VMA lock-based page fault handling first")
> Reported-by: Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ux.ibm.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/842502FB-F99C-417C-9648-A37D0ECDC9CE@linux.ibm.com
> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c | 8 ++------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
> index c7ae86b04b8a..e191b3ebd8d6 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
> @@ -479,17 +479,13 @@ static int ___do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long address,
>
> if (unlikely(access_pkey_error(is_write, is_exec,
> (error_code & DSISR_KEYFAULT), vma))) {
> - int rc = bad_access_pkey(regs, address, vma);
> -
> vma_end_read(vma);
> - return rc;
> + goto lock_mmap;
> }
>
> if (unlikely(access_error(is_write, is_exec, vma))) {
> - int rc = bad_access(regs, address);
> -
> vma_end_read(vma);
> - return rc;
> + goto lock_mmap;
> }
>
> fault = handle_mm_fault(vma, address, flags | FAULT_FLAG_VMA_LOCK, regs);
IIUC, that commit is neither upstream not in mm-stable -- it's unstable.
Maybe raise that as a review comment in reply to the original patch, so
we can easily connect the dots and squash it into the original,
problematic patch that is still under review.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists