Re: [PATCH] mm: larger stack guard gap, between vmas

[Willy Tarreau]

On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 12:36:11PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> @@ -2323,11 +2330,17 @@ int expand_downwards(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  	if (error)
>  		return error;
>  
> -	/* Enforce stack_guard_gap */
> +	/*
> +	 * Enforce stack_guard_gap, but allow VM_NONE mappings in the gap
> +	 * as some applications try to make their own stack guards
> +	 */
>  	gap_addr = address - stack_guard_gap;
>  	if (gap_addr > address)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
> -	prev = vma->vm_prev;
> +	for (prev = vma->vm_prev;
> +	     prev && !(prev->vm_flags & (VM_READ | VM_WRITE | VM_EXEC));
> +	     prev = prev->vm_prev)
> +		;
>  	if (prev && prev->vm_end > gap_addr) {
>  		if (!(prev->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN))
>  			return -ENOMEM;

Hmmm shouldn't we also stop looping when we're out of the gap ? Something
like this :

	for (prev = vma->vm_prev;
	     prev && !(prev->vm_flags & (VM_READ | VM_WRITE | VM_EXEC)) &&
	        address - prev->vm_end < stack_guard_gap;
	     prev = prev->vm_prev)
		;

This would limit the risk of runaway loops if someone is having fun
allocating a lot of memory in small chunks (eg: 4 GB in 1 million
independant mmap() calls).

Willy