Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Jan 2019 13:37:08 -0800 | From | Matthew Wilcox <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mm/mincore: allow for making sys_mincore() privileged |
| |
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 09:23:04PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > As I suggested earlier in the thread, the fix for RWF_NOWAIT might be > > to just move the test down to after readahead.
Your patch 3/3 just removes the test. Am I right in thinking that it doesn't need to be *moved* because the existing test after !PageUptodate catches it?
Of course, there aren't any tests for RWF_NOWAIT in xfstests. Are there any in LTP?
Some typos in the commit messages:
> Another aproach (checking file access permissions in order to decide "approach"
> Subject: [PATCH 2/3] mm/mincore: make mincore() more conservative > > The semantics of what mincore() considers to be resident is not completely > clearar, but Linux has always (since 2.3.52, which is when mincore() was "clear"
> initially done) treated it as "page is available in page cache". > > That's potentially a problem, as that [in]directly exposes meta-information > about pagecache / memory mapping state even about memory not strictly belonging > to the process executing the syscall, opening possibilities for sidechannel > attacks. > > Change the semantics of mincore() so that it only reveals pagecache information > for non-anonymous mappings that belog to files that the calling process could "belong"
| |