linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: init_mlocked_on_free

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: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 17:34:36 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 yjnworkstation@...il.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, willy@...radead.org,
 00107082@....com, libang.li@...group.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: init_mlocked_on_free_v3

On 01.06.24 16:09, Lance Yang wrote:
> Completely agree with David's point[1]. I'm also not convinced that this is the
> right approach :)
> 
> It seems like this patch won't handle all cases, as David mentioned[1] before.
> folio_remove_rmap_ptes() will immediately munlock a large folio (as large folios
> are not allowed to be batch-added to the LRU list) via munlock_vma_folio() when
> it is fully unmapped, so this patch does not work in this case. Even worse, if
> we encounter a COW mlocked folio, we would run into trouble (data corruption).
> 
> Hi Andrew, I just noticed that this patch has become part of v6.10-rc1, but it
> has not been acked/reviewed yet. Is there any chance to revert it?

Thanks Lance, for paying attention. I think I spotted this on LWN and 
thought "I don't recall that we agreed this is the right approach" but 
didn't have time to follow up.

My opinion on this did not change.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb