linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/7] io_uring: rsrc: use FOLL_SAME_FILE on 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]

Date:   Tue, 18 Apr 2023 17:35:48 +0100
From:   Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] io_uring: rsrc: use FOLL_SAME_FILE on
 pin_user_pages()

On 4/18/23 17:25, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 4/17/23 13:56, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 12:27:45AM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
>>> Commit edd478269640 ("io_uring/rsrc: disallow multi-source reg buffers")
>>> prevents io_pin_pages() from pinning pages spanning multiple VMAs with
>>> permitted characteristics (anon/huge), requiring that all VMAs share the
>>> same vm_file.
>>
>> That commmit doesn't really explain why io_uring is doing such a weird
>> thing.
>>
>> What exactly is the problem with mixing struct pages from different
>> files and why of all the GUP users does only io_uring need to care
>> about this?
> 
> Simply because it doesn't seem sane to mix and register buffers of
> different "nature" as one. It's not a huge deal for currently allowed
> types, e.g. mixing normal and huge anon pages, but it's rather a matter
> of time before it gets extended, and then I'll certainly become a
> problem. We've been asked just recently to allow registering bufs
> provided mapped by some specific driver, or there might be DMA mapped
> memory in the future.
> 
> Rejecting based on vmas might be too conservative, I agree and am all
> for if someone can help to make it right.

For some reason I thought it was rejecting if involves more than
one different vma. ->vm_file checks still sound fair to me, but in
any case, open to changing it.

-- 
Pavel Begunkov