From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
To: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <hughd@google.com>,
<linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/mlock: fix potential imbalanced rlimit ucounts adjustment
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2022 10:21:10 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h78036hl.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220314064039.62972-1-linmiaohe@huawei.com> (Miaohe Lin's message of "Mon, 14 Mar 2022 14:40:39 +0800")
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> writes:
> user_shm_lock forgets to set allowed to 0 when get_ucounts fails. So
> the later user_shm_unlock might do the extra dec_rlimit_ucounts. Fix
> this by resetting allowed to 0.
This fix looks correct. But the ability for people to follow and read
the code seems questionable. I saw in v1 of this patch Hugh originally
misread the logic.
Could we instead change the code to leave lock_limit at ULONG_MAX aka
RLIM_INFINITY, leave initialized to 0, and not even need a special case
of RLIM_INFINITY as nothing can be greater that ULONG_MAX?
Something like this?
diff --git a/mm/mlock.c b/mm/mlock.c
index 8f584eddd305..e7eabf5193ab 100644
--- a/mm/mlock.c
+++ b/mm/mlock.c
@@ -827,13 +827,12 @@ int user_shm_lock(size_t size, struct ucounts *ucounts)
locked = (size + PAGE_SIZE - 1) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
lock_limit = rlimit(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK);
- if (lock_limit == RLIM_INFINITY)
- allowed = 1;
- lock_limit >>= PAGE_SHIFT;
+ if (lock_limit != RLIM_INFINITY)
+ lock_limit >>= PAGE_SHIFT;
spin_lock(&shmlock_user_lock);
memlock = inc_rlimit_ucounts(ucounts, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, locked);
- if (!allowed && (memlock == LONG_MAX || memlock > lock_limit) && !capable(CAP_IPC_LOCK)) {
+ if ((memlock == LONG_MAX || memlock > lock_limit) && !capable(CAP_IPC_LOCK)) {
dec_rlimit_ucounts(ucounts, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, locked);
goto out;
}
>
> Fixes: d7c9e99aee48 ("Reimplement RLIMIT_MEMLOCK on top of ucounts")
> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
> Acked-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
> ---
> v1->v2:
> correct Fixes tag and collect Acked-by tag
> Thanks Hugh for review!
> ---
> mm/mlock.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mlock.c b/mm/mlock.c
> index 29372c0eebe5..efd2dd2943de 100644
> --- a/mm/mlock.c
> +++ b/mm/mlock.c
> @@ -733,6 +733,7 @@ int user_shm_lock(size_t size, struct ucounts *ucounts)
> }
> if (!get_ucounts(ucounts)) {
> dec_rlimit_ucounts(ucounts, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, locked);
> + allowed = 0;
> goto out;
> }
> allowed = 1;
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-14 15:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-14 6:40 Miaohe Lin
2022-03-14 15:21 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2022-03-15 12:17 ` Miaohe Lin
2022-03-15 18:32 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-03-16 6:55 ` Miaohe Lin
2022-03-16 14:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-03-17 1:50 ` Miaohe Lin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87h78036hl.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=legion@kernel.org \
--cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox