Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 10:41:22 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        Larry Woodman <lwoodman@redhat.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@parisc-linux.org>,
        Helge Diller <deller@gmx.de>, James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
        "security@kernel.org" <security@kernel.org>,
        linux-distros@vs.openwall.org,
        Qualys Security Advisory <qsa@qualys.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: larger stack guard gap, between vmas
Message-ID: <20170704084122.GC14722@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1706190355140.2626@eggly.anvils>
 <CA+55aFx6j4na3BVRC2aQuf-kNp1jzGahN8To_SFpNu+H=gopJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170619142358.GA32654@1wt.eu>
 <1498009101.2655.6.camel@decadent.org.uk>
 <20170621092419.GA22051@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <1498042057.2655.8.camel@decadent.org.uk>
 <1499126133.2707.20.camel@decadent.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFzMX72+Kb=zNgjCf6UfPt+C+e7WDp_rpbSLuOVx1k7iqg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzMX72+Kb=zNgjCf6UfPt+C+e7WDp_rpbSLuOVx1k7iqg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1700
Lines: 38

On Mon 03-07-17 17:05:27, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Firstly, some Rust programs are crashing on ppc64el with 64 KiB pages.
> > Apparently Rust maps its own guard page at the lower limit of the stack
> > (determined using pthread_getattr_np() and pthread_attr_getstack()).  I
> > don't think this ever actually worked for the main thread stack, but it
> > now also blocks expansion as the default stack size of 8 MiB is smaller
> > than the stack gap of 16 MiB.  Would it make sense to skip over
> > PROT_NONE mappings when checking whether it's safe to expand?

This is what my workaround for the older patch was doing, actually. We
have deployed that as a follow up fix on our older code bases. And this
has fixed verious issues with Java which was doing the similar thing.

> Hmm. Maybe.
> 
> Also, the whole notion that the gap should be relative to the page
> size never made sense to me. So I think we could/should just make the
> default gap size be one megabyte, not that "256 pages" abortion.

The reason for having this in page units was that MAX_ARG_STRLEN is in
page units as well. And this is used as an on stack variable quite
often. 1MB wouldn't be sufficient for that to cover - we could go with a
larger gap but who knows how many other traps are there.

> > Secondly, LibreOffice is crashing on i386 when running components
> > implemented in Java.  I don't have a diagnosis for this yet.
> 
> Ugh. Nobody seeing this inside SuSe/Red Hat? I don't think I've heard
> about this..

No reports yet but we do not support 32b kernels on newer kernels which
had the upstream fix.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs