linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/memory-failure: try to send SIGBUS even if unmap failed

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: <64df4f60-464a-4fae-81c3-f355c07410d0@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 09:58:42 -0700
From: Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
To: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>, nao.horiguchi@...il.com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/memory-failure: try to send SIGBUS even if unmap
 failed

On 5/8/2024 12:47 AM, Miaohe Lin wrote:

> On 2024/5/2 7:24, Jane Chu wrote:
>> For years when it comes down to kill a process due to hwpoison,
>> a SIGBUS is delivered only if unmap has been successful.
>> Otherwise, a SIGKILL is delivered. And the reason for that is
>> to prevent the involved process from accessing the hwpoisoned
>> page again.
>>
>> Since then a lot has changed, a hwpoisoned page is marked and
>> upon being re-accessed, the process will be killed immediately.
>> So let's take out the '!unmap_success' factor and try to deliver
>> SIGBUS if possible.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
>> ---
>>   mm/memory-failure.c | 13 ++++---------
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
>> index 9e62a00b46dd..7fcf182abb96 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
>> @@ -519,19 +519,14 @@ void add_to_kill_ksm(struct task_struct *tsk, struct page *p,
>>    * Also when FAIL is set do a force kill because something went
>>    * wrong earlier.
> Since @fail is removed, above comment should be removed too.
> Thanks.
> .

Good catch, will do.

Thanks!

-jane