From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2822C61DA4 for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 17:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 22A626B0071; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 12:10:32 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 1D9EA6B0074; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 12:10:32 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 0A3436B0078; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 12:10:32 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EACFA6B0071 for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 12:10:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin21.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60A1CA127E for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 17:10:31 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80426619462.21.045CD2B Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by imf12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D736D40027 for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 17:10:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf12.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=AUOMNJHK; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass (imf12.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com designates 170.10.133.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1675444229; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=iuz2DP65dYjCETbFIUxKt87h6CPUB+xFoYwiml2g5oc=; b=uO9O3sodVbdx/sXYacQ6pw25DOAkM8JzLVkYHZkDAY13A4rxWZFo3xOQgM1orTYF+gKiZA orFkkgqdgKEEtfZpu1FujHSekfbml3FjR9qX4G+UB/IC4lfLtoKZhcq8lD4P/VWBqxl6OP IwC9aeYMc94Bq1ojEhOd8VgwF93uNgE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf12.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=AUOMNJHK; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass (imf12.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com designates 170.10.133.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1675444229; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=3lMBVxB+FejB+qmBQlyt5icXeEb0Ama38cVSeAuGO7CQG6GQ3rH5UCTrjJksLZUKaM3UVm gqDznCoD8l4nqIcHmTDv2YRtrx7avdynBmPWMs+wDoEDfminy9wisusR+uh0SovvYpsw27 2sct5cD+JXIYfeUvZHqPzVeo0IeoWTA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1675444228; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=iuz2DP65dYjCETbFIUxKt87h6CPUB+xFoYwiml2g5oc=; b=AUOMNJHKj6AgNGp7+Qw1AjAJsVJQMA9wMUpo8bYGEiuVOg3GwPqXRDOFEEIfEs4uslVUfH BOAlXwYCV/ipIzkxMACJUNqMo0fsxBxyg68+ijcGxdaONBwfoztydGY25GD+wn+G8KN+6o dZ10O63xr+90VsGIYVF8NACe1e8SHCg= Received: from mail-wm1-f69.google.com (mail-wm1-f69.google.com [209.85.128.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-152-yqzlgp2lPQyE77KctAFHrA-1; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 12:10:27 -0500 X-MC-Unique: yqzlgp2lPQyE77KctAFHrA-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f69.google.com with SMTP id j20-20020a05600c1c1400b003dc5dd44c0cso2972690wms.8 for ; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 09:10:26 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:organization:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=iuz2DP65dYjCETbFIUxKt87h6CPUB+xFoYwiml2g5oc=; b=C28NvWJM6duOARW+/ceXBugFkaCXYp0cDxeIbCu4V0upMYNr/WeakWIUI4i/FdsxO+ woGvyGVmoyj2Z0IVLnMfdc+DoZhAnG16GsypZ/3gacWEs98f1cQBTYm0beW8ZvZB+ccd JHwEuLF5WJLDEETm+sQ93EMC+II5rBj1ru0H6Ug5l8K7/AAL0a2S8W4ZbKFwLvLE1iIL TUCjBqt1aKiladhchK0Uwzv1CwwlUNsmEcyig17G3/qmEYLIUWVBvA5Cq1eodR3+rj0l s65HnGoANT0vA6iOidiuxhjyh1Uzcjym/ZH6RwASRisD1+DIWTYnKCQyVWd0/Fl79Ezt dhPQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXNOInJpGKTnuOf0T2DERtJwB4QHPanpiTJoTAyMamdQJvim6Ej 8qnwz4nimoBhEGDTI8N4oSvngqizANAYwDb/Gh1qSbR0/1Dx9sq/nq26yfkE9wN6vTl45MlShtv w6eYD3TiWeaI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:cc3:b0:3dc:42d2:aeee with SMTP id fk3-20020a05600c0cc300b003dc42d2aeeemr10612941wmb.25.1675444225753; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 09:10:25 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+osovxAJGMG4BsZiC+9C1hGGUPMXH5t/s8vQX3PlweyD59D+sjA0Vy8iOz2yBZXul7+pSmuA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:cc3:b0:3dc:42d2:aeee with SMTP id fk3-20020a05600c0cc300b003dc42d2aeeemr10612925wmb.25.1675444225507; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 09:10:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2003:cb:c706:7900:b84d:7f2e:b638:3092? (p200300cbc7067900b84d7f2eb6383092.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:cb:c706:7900:b84d:7f2e:b638:3092]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u2-20020a7bc042000000b003dd8feea827sm8055409wmc.4.2023.02.03.09.10.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 03 Feb 2023 09:10:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <0b193743-b3ad-6e05-f6bb-ae5653fd5ef0@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 18:10:24 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Add overflow checks for several syscalls To: Wupeng Ma , akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kuleshovmail@gmail.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com References: <20230128063229.989058-1-mawupeng1@huawei.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: <20230128063229.989058-1-mawupeng1@huawei.com> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D736D40027 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: c1nt6868g9wuxasq3n5n6rrj8x8rxu8a X-HE-Tag: 1675444228-431844 X-HE-Meta: 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 gjJBZ8Qv NIZT1z7p3uBOav9TR10zx7IyfCwCPp6Ob3WdRYBnFPVS0OBoNHhXyeyU1AnxQSaS0gX+ZRAoG5QWYHnhu6W95yyDd0jCdoNrtVQt0Bo9bcj0W5nJwkM1/tkQsmnNnnQCHv38r2pfbhaDk7QiLKR76HdFwQpz8hwFSQA4mABqOo1B0bOB5VeY7GQ47l4uJjivVNrwVu1tJNZDusI1Se8G9Md/zpXy1YSv8+aXZGY+TG6UP7p4tJ4DUVtCsFjfqHcnRwe8vjPomDOq/3JKs0B/07vs8gwn52QiGJdCjh+KCGWa3Gv2DDSAnMa3Rg0irkUDaXy1zP4jMzGClf8s14cg0snsyQynkrI+IKLYlKzw13QtVWaSA+M5gIZL/UjeNTAMlCeEviEsIjF5jvGKlBZ2Aa/sYO5dmqWmAzflnEAWkxZ7p58Y= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 28.01.23 07:32, Wupeng Ma wrote: > From: Ma Wupeng > > While testing mlock, we have a problem if the len of mlock is ULONG_MAX. > The return value of mlock is zero. But nothing will be locked since the > len in do_mlock overflows to zero due to the following code in mlock: > > len = PAGE_ALIGN(len + (offset_in_page(start))); > > The same problem happens in munlock. > > Add new check and return -EINVAL to fix this overflowing scenarios since > they are absolutely wrong. > > Similar logic is used to fix problems with multiple syscalls. > > Changelog since v2[2]: > - modified the way of checking overflows based on Andrew's comments > > Changelog since v1[1]: > - only check overflow rather than access_ok to keep backward-compatibility Do you have some test cases and could we add them to LTP, for example? -- Thanks, David / dhildenb