Re: [PATCH] mm/gup: protect unpin_user_pages() against npages==-ERRNO
From: John Hubbard
Date: Sun Sep 20 2020 - 00:13:24 EST
On 9/19/20 8:03 PM, Souptick Joarder wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 1:11 PM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:57:06PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
As suggested by Dan Carpenter, fortify unpin_user_pages() just a bit,
against a typical caller mistake: check if the npages arg is really a
-ERRNO value, which would blow up the unpinning loop: WARN and return.
If this new WARN_ON() fires, then the system *might* be leaking pages
(by leaving them pinned), but probably not. More likely, gup/pup
returned a hard -ERRNO error to the caller, who erroneously passed it
Do we need a similar check inside unpin_user_pages_dirty_lock(),
when make_dirty set to false ?
Maybe not. This call is rarely if ever used for error handling, but
rather, for finishing up a successful use of the pages.
There is a balance between protecting against buggy callers and just
fixing any buggy callers. There is also a limit to how much code one can
write in hopes of avoiding bugs in...code that one writes. :) Which is
why static analysis, unit and regression tests, code reviews are
Here, I submit that that we're about to cross the line and go too far.
But if you have any examples of buggy callers for
unpin_user_pages_dirty_lock(), that might shift the line.
Or maybe others feel that we haven't gone far enough yet after all?