linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm/mremap: cleanup post-processing stage of mremap

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: <d3facf9d-9a65-401b-880e-4e321b6b4794@lucifer.local>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 16:28:58 +0100
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        "Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@...e.de>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm/mremap: cleanup post-processing stage of mremap

On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 03:49:09PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 7/7/25 07:27, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > Separate out the uffd bits so it clear's what's happening.
> >
> > Don't bother setting vrm->mmap_locked after unlocking, because after this
> > we are done anyway.
> >
> > The only time we drop the mmap lock is on VMA shrink, at which point
> > vrm->new_len will be < vrm->old_len and the operation will not be performed
> > anyway, so move this code out of the if (vrm->mmap_locked) block.
> >
> > All addresses returned by mremap() are page-aligned, so the
> > offset_in_page() check on ret seems only to be incorrectly trying to detect
>
> "incorrectly" to me implies there's a bug. But AFAIU there's not, so maybe
> e.g. "inappropriately"?
>
> > whether an error occurred - explicitly check for this.
> >
> > No functional change intended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>

Thanks! :)

>
> Just a nit:
>
> > ---
> >  mm/mremap.c | 22 +++++++++++++---------
> >  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c
> > index 60eb0ac8634b..660bdb75e2f9 100644
> > --- a/mm/mremap.c
> > +++ b/mm/mremap.c
> > @@ -1729,6 +1729,15 @@ static int check_prep_vma(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm)
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >
> > +static void notify_uffd(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm, unsigned long ret)
>
> "ret" not "res"? :) Or actually why not name it for what it is,
> mremap_userfaultfd_complete() names the parameter "to". Maybe to_addr or
> new_addr?

Later in the series we eliminate this as you've seen, but still worth fixign up
I think, will do on respin!

>
> > +{
> > +	struct mm_struct *mm = current->mm;
> > +
> > +	userfaultfd_unmap_complete(mm, vrm->uf_unmap_early);
> > +	mremap_userfaultfd_complete(vrm->uf, vrm->addr, ret, vrm->old_len);
> > +	userfaultfd_unmap_complete(mm, vrm->uf_unmap);
> > +}
> > +
> >  static unsigned long do_mremap(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm)
> >  {
> >  	struct mm_struct *mm = current->mm;
> > @@ -1754,18 +1763,13 @@ static unsigned long do_mremap(struct vma_remap_struct *vrm)
> >  	res = vrm_implies_new_addr(vrm) ? mremap_to(vrm) : mremap_at(vrm);
> >
> >  out:
> > -	if (vrm->mmap_locked) {
> > +	if (vrm->mmap_locked)
> >  		mmap_write_unlock(mm);
> > -		vrm->mmap_locked = false;
> > -
> > -		if (!offset_in_page(res) && vrm->mlocked && vrm->new_len > vrm->old_len)
> > -			mm_populate(vrm->new_addr + vrm->old_len, vrm->delta);
> > -	}
> >
> > -	userfaultfd_unmap_complete(mm, vrm->uf_unmap_early);
> > -	mremap_userfaultfd_complete(vrm->uf, vrm->addr, res, vrm->old_len);
> > -	userfaultfd_unmap_complete(mm, vrm->uf_unmap);
> > +	if (!IS_ERR_VALUE(res) && vrm->mlocked && vrm->new_len > vrm->old_len)
> > +		mm_populate(vrm->new_addr + vrm->old_len, vrm->delta);
> >
> > +	notify_uffd(vrm, res);
> >  	return res;
> >  }
> >
>