Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm,fork: introduce MADV_WIPEONFORK

[Rik van Riel]

On Tue, 2017-08-15 at 15:51 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 17:28:29 -0400 riel@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > A further complication is the proliferation of clone flags,
> > programs bypassing glibc's functions to call clone directly,
> > and programs calling unshare, causing the glibc pthread_atfork
> > hook to not get called.
> > 
> > It would be better to have the kernel take care of this
> > automatically.
> 
> I'll add "The patch also adds MADV_KEEPONFORK, to undo the effects of
> a
> prior MADV_WIPEONFORK." here.
> 
> I guess it isn't worth mentioning that these things can cause VMA
> merges and splits.Â

That's the same as every other Linux specific madvise operation.

> > --- a/mm/madvise.c
> > +++ b/mm/madvise.c
> > @@ -80,6 +80,17 @@ static long madvise_behavior(struct
> > vm_area_struct *vma,
> > Â		}
> > Â		new_flags &= ~VM_DONTCOPY;
> > Â		break;
> > +	case MADV_WIPEONFORK:
> > +		/* MADV_WIPEONFORK is only supported on anonymous
> > memory. */
> > +		if (vma->vm_file || vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED) {
> > +			error = -EINVAL;
> > +			goto out;
> > +		}
> > +		new_flags |= VM_WIPEONFORK;
> > +		break;
> > +	case MADV_KEEPONFORK:
> > +		new_flags &= ~VM_WIPEONFORK;
> > +		break;
> > Â	case MADV_DONTDUMP:
> > Â		new_flags |= VM_DONTDUMP;
> > Â		break;
> 
> It seems odd to permit MADV_KEEPONFORK against other-than-anon vmas?

Given that the only way to set VM_WIPEONFORK is through
MADV_WIPEONFORK, calling MADV_KEEPONFORK on an
other-than-anon vma would be equivalent to a noop.

If new_flags == vma->vm_flags, madvise_behavior() will
immediately exit.