[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250221152841.GA24705@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 16:28:41 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
"Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com,
Guohanjun <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v2] uprobes: fix two zero old_folio bugs in
__replace_page()
On 02/21, Tong Tiangen wrote:
>
> --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> @@ -506,6 +506,11 @@ int uprobe_write_opcode(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct mm_struct *mm,
> if (ret <= 0)
> goto put_old;
>
> + if (is_zero_page(old_page)) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto put_old;
> + }
I agree with David, the subject looks a bit misleading.
And. I won't insist, this is cosmetic, but if you send V2 please consider
moving the "verify_opcode()" check down, after the is_zero_page/PageCompound
checks.
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists