[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6dd3af08-b3be-4a68-af3d-1fc1b79f4279@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2025 14:26:21 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: Pu Lehui <pulehui@...weicloud.com>, mhiramat@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
vbabka@...e.cz, jannh@...gle.com, pfalcato@...e.de, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, pulehui@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] mm: Fix uprobe pte be overwritten when expanding
vma
On 02.06.25 13:55, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 08:51:14PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> if (vp->remove) {
>>> @@ -1823,6 +1829,14 @@ struct vm_area_struct *copy_vma(struct vm_area_struct **vmap,
>>> faulted_in_anon_vma = false;
>>> }
>>> + /*
>>> + * If the VMA we are copying might contain a uprobe PTE, ensure
>>> + * that we do not establish one upon merge. Otherwise, when mremap()
>>> + * moves page tables, it will orphan the newly created PTE.
>>> + */
>>> + if (vma->vm_file)
>>> + vmg.skip_vma_uprobe = true;
>>> +
>>
>> Assuming we extend the VMA on the way (not merge), would we handle that
>> properly?
>>
>> Or is that not possible on this code path or already broken either way?
>
> I'm not sure in what context you mean expand, vma_merge_new_range() calls
> vma_expand() so we call an expand a merge here, and this flag will be
> obeyed.
Essentially, an mremap() that grows an existing mapping while moving it.
Assume we have
[ VMA 0 ] [ VMA X]
And want to grow VMA 0 by 1 page.
We cannot grow in-place, so we'll have to copy VMA 0 to another VMA, and
while at it, expand it by 1 page.
expand_vma()->move_vma()->copy_vma_and_data()->copy_vma()
But maybe I'm getting lost in the code. (e.g., expand_vma() vs.
vma_expand() ... confusing :) )
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists