2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-02 19:15:33 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:34 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:37 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:25 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2016-01-15 16:52:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:37 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2016-01-15 16:52:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2016-01-15 16:52:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2016-01-15 16:52:20 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros
PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time
ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page
cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE.
This promise never materialized. And unlikely will.
We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to
PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether
PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case,
especially on the border between fs and mm.
Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much
breakage to be doable.
Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are
not.
The changes are pretty straight-forward:
- <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;
- <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;
- PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN};
- page_cache_get() -> get_page();
- page_cache_release() -> put_page();
This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using
script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files.
I've called spatch for them manually.
The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to
PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later.
There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll
fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also
will be addressed with the separate patch.
virtual patch
@@
expression E;
@@
- E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E
@@
expression E;
@@
- E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT
+ PAGE_SHIFT
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SIZE
+ PAGE_SIZE
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_MASK
+ PAGE_MASK
@@
expression E;
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E)
+ PAGE_ALIGN(E)
@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_get(E)
+ get_page(E)
@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_release(E)
+ put_page(E)
Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:37 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:37 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-09 17:24:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-09 17:24:07 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-24 14:58:28 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:32 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-24 14:58:28 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-24 14:58:28 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:25 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:58 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:16 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-06 16:23:06 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:28 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-06 16:23:06 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-06 16:23:09 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2017-09-06 16:23:06 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-06 16:23:09 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-06 16:23:06 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
userfaultfd: prevent non-cooperative events vs mcopy_atomic races
If a process monitored with userfaultfd changes it's memory mappings or
forks() at the same time as uffd monitor fills the process memory with
UFFDIO_COPY, the actual creation of page table entries and copying of
the data in mcopy_atomic may happen either before of after the memory
mapping modifications and there is no way for the uffd monitor to
maintain consistent view of the process memory layout.
For instance, let's consider fork() running in parallel with
userfaultfd_copy():
process | uffd monitor
---------------------------------+------------------------------
fork() | userfaultfd_copy()
... | ...
dup_mmap() | down_read(mmap_sem)
down_write(mmap_sem) | /* create PTEs, copy data */
dup_uffd() | up_read(mmap_sem)
copy_page_range() |
up_write(mmap_sem) |
dup_uffd_complete() |
/* notify monitor */ |
If the userfaultfd_copy() takes the mmap_sem first, the new page(s) will
be present by the time copy_page_range() is called and they will appear
in the child's memory mappings. However, if the fork() is the first to
take the mmap_sem, the new pages won't be mapped in the child's address
space.
If the pages are not present and child tries to access them, the monitor
will get page fault notification and everything is fine. However, if
the pages *are present*, the child can access them without uffd
noticing. And if we copy them into child it'll see the wrong data.
Since we are talking about background copy, we'd need to decide whether
the pages should be copied or not regardless #PF notifications.
Since userfaultfd monitor has no way to determine what was the order,
let's disallow userfaultfd_copy in parallel with the non-cooperative
events. In such case we return -EAGAIN and the uffd monitor can
understand that userfaultfd_copy() clashed with a non-cooperative event
and take an appropriate action.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1527061324-19949-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Andrei Vagin <avagin@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2018-06-07 17:09:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
userfaultfd: prevent non-cooperative events vs mcopy_atomic races
If a process monitored with userfaultfd changes it's memory mappings or
forks() at the same time as uffd monitor fills the process memory with
UFFDIO_COPY, the actual creation of page table entries and copying of
the data in mcopy_atomic may happen either before of after the memory
mapping modifications and there is no way for the uffd monitor to
maintain consistent view of the process memory layout.
For instance, let's consider fork() running in parallel with
userfaultfd_copy():
process | uffd monitor
---------------------------------+------------------------------
fork() | userfaultfd_copy()
... | ...
dup_mmap() | down_read(mmap_sem)
down_write(mmap_sem) | /* create PTEs, copy data */
dup_uffd() | up_read(mmap_sem)
copy_page_range() |
up_write(mmap_sem) |
dup_uffd_complete() |
/* notify monitor */ |
If the userfaultfd_copy() takes the mmap_sem first, the new page(s) will
be present by the time copy_page_range() is called and they will appear
in the child's memory mappings. However, if the fork() is the first to
take the mmap_sem, the new pages won't be mapped in the child's address
space.
If the pages are not present and child tries to access them, the monitor
will get page fault notification and everything is fine. However, if
the pages *are present*, the child can access them without uffd
noticing. And if we copy them into child it'll see the wrong data.
Since we are talking about background copy, we'd need to decide whether
the pages should be copied or not regardless #PF notifications.
Since userfaultfd monitor has no way to determine what was the order,
let's disallow userfaultfd_copy in parallel with the non-cooperative
events. In such case we return -EAGAIN and the uffd monitor can
understand that userfaultfd_copy() clashed with a non-cooperative event
and take an appropriate action.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1527061324-19949-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Andrei Vagin <avagin@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2018-06-07 17:09:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-24 14:58:28 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:34 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:32 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-24 14:58:28 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:43 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-24 14:58:28 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:42:55 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-22 15:43:34 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:28 -08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2016-03-17 14:19:11 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-06 16:23:06 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-11-30 14:09:25 -08:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:08 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros
PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time
ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page
cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE.
This promise never materialized. And unlikely will.
We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to
PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether
PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case,
especially on the border between fs and mm.
Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much
breakage to be doable.
Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are
not.
The changes are pretty straight-forward:
- <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;
- <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;
- PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN};
- page_cache_get() -> get_page();
- page_cache_release() -> put_page();
This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using
script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files.
I've called spatch for them manually.
The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to
PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later.
There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll
fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also
will be addressed with the separate patch.
virtual patch
@@
expression E;
@@
- E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E
@@
expression E;
@@
- E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT
+ PAGE_SHIFT
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SIZE
+ PAGE_SIZE
@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_MASK
+ PAGE_MASK
@@
expression E;
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E)
+ PAGE_ALIGN(E)
@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_get(E)
+ get_page(E)
@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_release(E)
+ put_page(E)
Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
userfaultfd: prevent non-cooperative events vs mcopy_atomic races
If a process monitored with userfaultfd changes it's memory mappings or
forks() at the same time as uffd monitor fills the process memory with
UFFDIO_COPY, the actual creation of page table entries and copying of
the data in mcopy_atomic may happen either before of after the memory
mapping modifications and there is no way for the uffd monitor to
maintain consistent view of the process memory layout.
For instance, let's consider fork() running in parallel with
userfaultfd_copy():
process | uffd monitor
---------------------------------+------------------------------
fork() | userfaultfd_copy()
... | ...
dup_mmap() | down_read(mmap_sem)
down_write(mmap_sem) | /* create PTEs, copy data */
dup_uffd() | up_read(mmap_sem)
copy_page_range() |
up_write(mmap_sem) |
dup_uffd_complete() |
/* notify monitor */ |
If the userfaultfd_copy() takes the mmap_sem first, the new page(s) will
be present by the time copy_page_range() is called and they will appear
in the child's memory mappings. However, if the fork() is the first to
take the mmap_sem, the new pages won't be mapped in the child's address
space.
If the pages are not present and child tries to access them, the monitor
will get page fault notification and everything is fine. However, if
the pages *are present*, the child can access them without uffd
noticing. And if we copy them into child it'll see the wrong data.
Since we are talking about background copy, we'd need to decide whether
the pages should be copied or not regardless #PF notifications.
Since userfaultfd monitor has no way to determine what was the order,
let's disallow userfaultfd_copy in parallel with the non-cooperative
events. In such case we return -EAGAIN and the uffd monitor can
understand that userfaultfd_copy() clashed with a non-cooperative event
and take an appropriate action.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1527061324-19949-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Andrei Vagin <avagin@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2018-06-07 17:09:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
userfaultfd: prevent non-cooperative events vs mcopy_atomic races
If a process monitored with userfaultfd changes it's memory mappings or
forks() at the same time as uffd monitor fills the process memory with
UFFDIO_COPY, the actual creation of page table entries and copying of
the data in mcopy_atomic may happen either before of after the memory
mapping modifications and there is no way for the uffd monitor to
maintain consistent view of the process memory layout.
For instance, let's consider fork() running in parallel with
userfaultfd_copy():
process | uffd monitor
---------------------------------+------------------------------
fork() | userfaultfd_copy()
... | ...
dup_mmap() | down_read(mmap_sem)
down_write(mmap_sem) | /* create PTEs, copy data */
dup_uffd() | up_read(mmap_sem)
copy_page_range() |
up_write(mmap_sem) |
dup_uffd_complete() |
/* notify monitor */ |
If the userfaultfd_copy() takes the mmap_sem first, the new page(s) will
be present by the time copy_page_range() is called and they will appear
in the child's memory mappings. However, if the fork() is the first to
take the mmap_sem, the new pages won't be mapped in the child's address
space.
If the pages are not present and child tries to access them, the monitor
will get page fault notification and everything is fine. However, if
the pages *are present*, the child can access them without uffd
noticing. And if we copy them into child it'll see the wrong data.
Since we are talking about background copy, we'd need to decide whether
the pages should be copied or not regardless #PF notifications.
Since userfaultfd monitor has no way to determine what was the order,
let's disallow userfaultfd_copy in parallel with the non-cooperative
events. In such case we return -EAGAIN and the uffd monitor can
understand that userfaultfd_copy() clashed with a non-cooperative event
and take an appropriate action.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1527061324-19949-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Andrei Vagin <avagin@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2018-06-07 17:09:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
userfaultfd: prevent non-cooperative events vs mcopy_atomic races
If a process monitored with userfaultfd changes it's memory mappings or
forks() at the same time as uffd monitor fills the process memory with
UFFDIO_COPY, the actual creation of page table entries and copying of
the data in mcopy_atomic may happen either before of after the memory
mapping modifications and there is no way for the uffd monitor to
maintain consistent view of the process memory layout.
For instance, let's consider fork() running in parallel with
userfaultfd_copy():
process | uffd monitor
---------------------------------+------------------------------
fork() | userfaultfd_copy()
... | ...
dup_mmap() | down_read(mmap_sem)
down_write(mmap_sem) | /* create PTEs, copy data */
dup_uffd() | up_read(mmap_sem)
copy_page_range() |
up_write(mmap_sem) |
dup_uffd_complete() |
/* notify monitor */ |
If the userfaultfd_copy() takes the mmap_sem first, the new page(s) will
be present by the time copy_page_range() is called and they will appear
in the child's memory mappings. However, if the fork() is the first to
take the mmap_sem, the new pages won't be mapped in the child's address
space.
If the pages are not present and child tries to access them, the monitor
will get page fault notification and everything is fine. However, if
the pages *are present*, the child can access them without uffd
noticing. And if we copy them into child it'll see the wrong data.
Since we are talking about background copy, we'd need to decide whether
the pages should be copied or not regardless #PF notifications.
Since userfaultfd monitor has no way to determine what was the order,
let's disallow userfaultfd_copy in parallel with the non-cooperative
events. In such case we return -EAGAIN and the uffd monitor can
understand that userfaultfd_copy() clashed with a non-cooperative event
and take an appropriate action.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1527061324-19949-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Andrei Vagin <avagin@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2018-06-07 17:09:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
userfaultfd: prevent non-cooperative events vs mcopy_atomic races
If a process monitored with userfaultfd changes it's memory mappings or
forks() at the same time as uffd monitor fills the process memory with
UFFDIO_COPY, the actual creation of page table entries and copying of
the data in mcopy_atomic may happen either before of after the memory
mapping modifications and there is no way for the uffd monitor to
maintain consistent view of the process memory layout.
For instance, let's consider fork() running in parallel with
userfaultfd_copy():
process | uffd monitor
---------------------------------+------------------------------
fork() | userfaultfd_copy()
... | ...
dup_mmap() | down_read(mmap_sem)
down_write(mmap_sem) | /* create PTEs, copy data */
dup_uffd() | up_read(mmap_sem)
copy_page_range() |
up_write(mmap_sem) |
dup_uffd_complete() |
/* notify monitor */ |
If the userfaultfd_copy() takes the mmap_sem first, the new page(s) will
be present by the time copy_page_range() is called and they will appear
in the child's memory mappings. However, if the fork() is the first to
take the mmap_sem, the new pages won't be mapped in the child's address
space.
If the pages are not present and child tries to access them, the monitor
will get page fault notification and everything is fine. However, if
the pages *are present*, the child can access them without uffd
noticing. And if we copy them into child it'll see the wrong data.
Since we are talking about background copy, we'd need to decide whether
the pages should be copied or not regardless #PF notifications.
Since userfaultfd monitor has no way to determine what was the order,
let's disallow userfaultfd_copy in parallel with the non-cooperative
events. In such case we return -EAGAIN and the uffd monitor can
understand that userfaultfd_copy() clashed with a non-cooperative event
and take an appropriate action.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1527061324-19949-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Andrei Vagin <avagin@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2018-06-07 17:09:25 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2015-09-04 15:47:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
