Re: [RFC][PATCHES] iov_iter.c rewrite

[Al Viro]

On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:14:13AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> For a vmalloc() address, you'd have to actually walk the page tables.
> Which is a f*cking horrible idea. Don't do it. We do have a
> "vmalloc_to_page()" that does it, but the basic issue is that you damn
> well shouldn't do IO on vmalloc'ed addresses.  vmalloc'ed addresses
> only exist in the first place to give a linear *virtual* mapping, if
> you want physical pages you shouldn't have mixed it up with vmalloc in
> the first place!
> 
> Where the hell does this crop up, and who does this insane thing
> anyway? It's wrong. How did it ever work before?

finit_module() with O_DIRECT descriptor.  And I suspect that "not well"
is the answer - it used to call get_user_pages_fast() in that case.

I certainly had missed that insanity during the analysis - we don't do
a lot of O_DIRECT IO to/from kernel addresses of any sort...  This
codepath allows it ;-/  Ability to trigger it is equivalent to ability
to run any code in kernel mode, so it's not an additional security hole,
but...
--
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/