lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jan]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 32/41] mm: prevent userfaults to be handled under per-vma lock
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:51 PM Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 9:55 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> > Due to the possibility of handle_userfault dropping mmap_lock, avoid fault
> > handling under VMA lock and retry holding mmap_lock. This can be handled
> > more gracefully in the future.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> > Suggested-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > mm/memory.c | 7 +++++++
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> > index 20806bc8b4eb..12508f4d845a 100644
> > --- a/mm/memory.c
> > +++ b/mm/memory.c
> > @@ -5273,6 +5273,13 @@ struct vm_area_struct *lock_vma_under_rcu(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > if (!vma->anon_vma)
> > goto inval;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * Due to the possibility of userfault handler dropping mmap_lock, avoid
> > + * it for now and fall back to page fault handling under mmap_lock.
> > + */
> > + if (userfaultfd_armed(vma))
> > + goto inval;
>
> This looks racy wrt concurrent userfaultfd_register(). I think you'll
> want to do the userfaultfd_armed(vma) check _after_ locking the VMA,

I still think this change is needed...

> and ensure that the userfaultfd code write-locks the VMA before
> changing the __VM_UFFD_FLAGS in vma->vm_flags.

Ah, but now I see you already took care of this half of the issue with
the reset_vm_flags() change in
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20230109205336.3665937-16-surenb@google.com/
.


> > if (!vma_read_trylock(vma))
> > goto inval;
> >
> > --
> > 2.39.0
> >

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-26 23:44    [W:0.467 / U:0.580 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site