Re: [PATCH] sys_remap_file_pages: fix ->vm_file accounting

[Oleg Nesterov]

(remove stable@xxxxxxxxxx from CC)

On 02/02, Matt Helsley wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 20:26 +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > 
> > Offtopic. I noticed this problem while looking at this patch:
> > 
> > 	http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm-commits&m=120141116911711
> > 
> > So this (the old vma could be removed before we create the new mapping)
> > means that the patch above has another problem: if we are remapping the
> > whole VM_EXECUTABLE vma, removed_exe_file_vma() can clear ->exe_file
> > while it shouldn't (Matt Helsley cc'ed).
> > 
> > Oleg.
> 
> 	Looking at sys_remap_file_pages() it appears that the shared flag must
> be set in order to remap. Executable mappings are always MAP_PRIVATE and
> hence lack the shared flag so that any modifications to those areas
> don't get written back to the executable. I don't think userspace can
> change this flag

Yes, userspace can't change it. But if MVFS changes ->vm_file it could also
change vm_flags... But I think you are right anyway, we shouldn't care.


So I have to try to find another bug ;) Suppose that ->load_binary() does
a series of do_mmap(MAP_EXECUTABLE). It is possible that mmap_region() can
merge 2 vmas. In that case we "leak" ->num_exe_file_vmas. Unless I missed
something, mmap_region() should do removed_exe_file_vma() when vma_merge()
succeds (near fput(file)).

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/