linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/8] mm: implement sticky VMA flags

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: <4dodae73i5ganur6llvbbxcojt4uailsxs6sr5w2jr4a7tzxkf@26rmrmcdjvlz>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 13:27:08 +0000
From: Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@...e.de>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, 
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, 
	David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, "Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, 
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, 
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, 
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, 
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>, 
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, Nico Pache <npache@...hat.com>, 
	Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>, Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>, 
	Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>, Aishwarya.TCV@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/8] mm: implement sticky VMA flags

On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 01:16:36PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2025 at 04:11:48PM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > It is useful to be able to designate that certain flags are 'sticky', that
> > is, if two VMAs are merged one with a flag of this nature and one without,
> > the merged VMA sets this flag.
> 
> I'm seeing regressions on multiple arm64 platforms in at least the LTP
> clone302 and madvise10 selftests, both of which have bisected to one of
> the fixups to this patch.  Especially given the other tests that also
> bisected to the same place I've not investigated further.  There's a
> number of other LTP tests that started failing today including relevant
> seeming ones munlockall01, mprotect04, madvise10, mprotect03 and
> futex_cmp_requeue01 but I don't have bisects to confirm they're the same
> thing.
>

Thanks for the reports!
 
> clone302:
> 
> tst_buffers.c:57: TINFO: Test is using guarded buffers
> tst_tmpdir.c:316: TINFO: Using /tmp/LTP_clorMwMMw as tmpdir (nfs filesystem)
> tst_test.c:1953: TINFO: LTP version: 20250530
> tst_test.c:1956: TINFO: Tested kernel: 6.18.0-rc6-next-20251119 #1 SMP PREEMPT @1763523415 aarch64

next-20251119 still has the v3 version of the patchset, which is Known Bad(tm)
after a couple of buggy fixups. v4 should hopefully work properly.

-- 
Pedro