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 011E8C6FD1F for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 11:27:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 77AB26B007B; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 07:27:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 703826B007D; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 07:27:48 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 57E056B007E; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 07:27:48 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 413876B007B for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 07:27:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin18.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5FCAAE55 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 11:27:47 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80596309374.18.3DC7BB6 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by imf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1CC11A0010 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 11:27:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=RnUjgM5X; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com designates 170.10.133.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1679484465; 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=fExeCVSfXhamVGjGq2iHtJb90MRnZXhs1bW6+hfCEAk=; b=3O54WOdELGCLPWEGFungj5SSUWagbL2rqGRx+1eqpi5QZpzQrCLSNwCImM/pU1oSvYwOsC Ypf1BSB7v5OC04owaM2Iw1YOH5OtprtSOKLqo7QcMEd/kJS9GXM3pQRfYmG4aS/0rnOAiV rqV2iMFmuG611o/aHT1PNFS6HmBrMyk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=RnUjgM5X; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com designates 170.10.133.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1679484465; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=YUlPLQLkiFSgoM868Q+yJPgVSb3l2oAKtVrmgw19Uc4EVHFga6RU5vWn1w/XBVfNBRRDyy Fxqa41onI8ILbAjtmT5eXEHWa/BOBAB2P0s8/FDuSui5UvPkCnsDEJxKV0GPFABbyEqdC+ RY716mopIkS6i+GZRhE9KJu9cvFa1zI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1679484465; 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=fExeCVSfXhamVGjGq2iHtJb90MRnZXhs1bW6+hfCEAk=; b=RnUjgM5Xzrvd7grUS0Xd3ogMOGq6bodirChnLCFS6o8/wAg/FGLV1PLjJqeYdQlXSPwGkl N9WpbUVz2WxyBHV4E9NhOAfthFgphAZrxw5c5bBqjjaMyjdmoHQAa44FHHDo1oS9YWkNKG lyw3iDEXb9L22tfcqHTJLT+xxFW5Q4M= Received: from mail-wm1-f72.google.com (mail-wm1-f72.google.com [209.85.128.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-22-hG_XVRghM4GntWplsZ5qHA-1; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 07:27:42 -0400 X-MC-Unique: hG_XVRghM4GntWplsZ5qHA-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f72.google.com with SMTP id r35-20020a05600c322300b003edce6ff3b4so4324433wmp.4 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 04:27:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679484461; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:organization:from:references :cc:to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=fExeCVSfXhamVGjGq2iHtJb90MRnZXhs1bW6+hfCEAk=; b=tupwYqfU45ctnXWE5un/oWJXKB83xtuTWEFGv1mKa2pVQOGJoLreI0We6fpJNWFZ83 TfLMu1HBJvjqu70QZfRyg+hSIQBX/14ZLxjpzXI4pMJlZPUskp3qfhNF6gtuiazzUFuj 11fGlGKEUXfID0MCyxzyhZ9BsY0vn+CL3GfdzNc4YamaHAZvzEbjMv5jbNaoDe3o1fqC +gfsl3efyiKNua99Mnba4/mhquF5sJlBwOPz1s09G6F/A9R1nk3fgL4SJKyiw9TWlLOV oPf6L/DaiDBiILmI36SPTwOb6wUmHrQi6cIi3iOkWTCwqUoT33FFtZqTU985kHe5RYvr rc/w== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKVJ3uNmBW6Met+OxpDnL/nxry0sP9LcLiMrJfFEhYtCktk7V3JE IOlHIXGf0CihIR0hb5vUlayZG/oi5rh9c18ctpQ43Q+Y6OXVd9xCNtl7FVh1LHGt7M60GwEcI5U 6aoIIeSWBUd8= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6105:0:b0:2d4:7e19:a7fa with SMTP id v5-20020a5d6105000000b002d47e19a7famr4903980wrt.50.1679484461624; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 04:27:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set90ZlH6TY+pFDLKJMYrm5kRNQS5Xp1TtFAlh5J6Icw+XC5xE8rWEzD/kMpw4qEMgzdk2G/PgA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6105:0:b0:2d4:7e19:a7fa with SMTP id v5-20020a5d6105000000b002d47e19a7famr4903969wrt.50.1679484461322; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 04:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2003:cb:c703:d00:ca74:d9ea:11e0:dfb? (p200300cbc7030d00ca74d9ea11e00dfb.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:cb:c703:d00:ca74:d9ea:11e0:dfb]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h13-20020a5d430d000000b002d75ef32032sm6682236wrq.68.2023.03.22.04.27.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Mar 2023 04:27:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3600eca8-1924-0a8e-ea9a-ab362c9e2967@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 12:27:40 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] mm/mlock: return EINVAL if len overflows for mlock/munlock To: mawupeng , akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kuleshovmail@gmail.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com References: <20230320024739.224850-1-mawupeng1@huawei.com> <20230320024739.224850-2-mawupeng1@huawei.com> <27b9cb5b-0118-f989-80c2-6a143a4232af@redhat.com> <3ef9520c-6713-527a-0214-ac7a8bb2d49c@huawei.com> <6dd844f7-d43b-c744-f295-9f14c68d3928@redhat.com> <8be13253-b4ca-b134-3e85-b4097484bb29@huawei.com> <9583bc53-716d-f2ff-38e7-1dda7e57dd5d@redhat.com> <9b531543-9f97-178f-8a97-494322410806@redhat.com> <7473311c-b259-c90d-e19b-66c27fd49dba@huawei.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: <7473311c-b259-c90d-e19b-66c27fd49dba@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: 8bit X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: B1CC11A0010 X-Stat-Signature: 1at7hba7iu7ptei51464bqd9apoeptq8 X-HE-Tag: 1679484465-734735 X-HE-Meta: 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 6QCAHr+k 5fnYhs4kREyATjjL7Qegp4uYd3mzWP6Nabu03nD9k6ZK2X+lKSRmfRDUz7lA3uPaX9Fql45c4fCc67M/YAd71gcdLDKNROPr0y8sx63O1KaGuxzp67g2LgrVtr9GAQv1hylfCqxVo+F4hoAbZQgv4J4TIbhUgywIqLZm21udLvscS5uNSW5g103jks+SU6Yqvno5Nof77CE7/WB4N5qRhAPf90bCKCeziLXxPTUWtZfqReDdWZX7+7In9IYP43wIYgSPFuvyD4SeU8xnpoW6IDcBTg1PpU5QUstjDHYn/p/X3lHJ/7QNKeZmyC2di0GO7dNFmtXNleTsUAWgsCXFMd+5RaIcsN1hN78NO0a4DHy7cIJyWbE2POvrP0XHkipc5GJ8kDlJTSo8k+bLuOskoYDzqvojgpMPKav2jt5mSywwbaBI= 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 22.03.23 10:20, mawupeng wrote: > > > On 2023/3/22 17:01, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 22.03.23 09:54, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> On 22.03.23 03:14, mawupeng wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2023/3/21 22:19, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>> On 21.03.23 08:44, mawupeng wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2023/3/20 18:54, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>>>> On 20.03.23 03:47, 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. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thinking again, wouldn't we reject mlock(0, ULONG_MAX) now as well? >>>>>> >>>>>> mlock will return 0 if len is zero which is the same w/o this patchset. >>>>>> Here is the calltrace if len is zero. >>>>>> >>>>>> mlock(len == 0) >>>>>>       do_mlock(len == 0) >>>>>>           if (!len) >>>>>>               return 0 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I was asking about addr=0, len=ULONG_MAX. >>>>> >>>>> IIUC, that used to work but could now fail? I haven't played with it, though. >>>> >>>> Thanks for reviewing. >>>> >>>> Previous for add = 0 and len == ULONG_MAX, mlock will return ok(0) since len overflows to zero. >>>> IFAICT, this is not right since mlock do noting(lock nothing) and return ok(0). >>>> >>>> With this patch, for the same situation, mlock can return EINVAL as expected. >>> >>> Quoting the man page: >>> >>> "EINVAL (mlock(),  mlock2(),  and  munlock()) The result of the addition >>> addr+len was less than addr (e.g., the addition may have resulted in an >>> overflow)." >>> >>> ULONG_MAX+0 = ULONG_MAX >>> >>> There is no overflow expected. The proper way to implement it would be >>> to handle that case and not fail with EINVAL. >>> >>> At least that would be expected when reading the man page. >>> >> >> As a side note, I agree that failing with EINVAL is better than doing noting (mlocking nothing). But I am not sure what we are expected to do in that case ... the man page is a bit vague on that. > > Thanks for you reviewing. > > Can we try to expand the man page since overflow is considered in man page? I guess we could spell out that Linux aligns the length up to the next page boundary, and that overflow checks are performed on this aligned length. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb