Received: by 10.192.165.156 with SMTP id m28csp944558imm; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:39:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+zp4GrFxbhuB+Wu9FF02mvfaAKMt9CKWz0ZDnaq7zzktmM8RHrluCd4wx4WH7RUuFxnRSx X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9896:: with SMTP id s22-v6mr5881741plp.240.1523464794035; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:39:54 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1523464793; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=MADnv11Hbu+YAO/MokIN4bHnZD32NntCArY4Z6P/4ZKy2FgL094vD3pUsXze2BDBb9 eiJSKIE25FeFnxDalBgeAp6IPaHd+YL96d5mt6wbXbWOguIoW2lqR8wtt2gsw95a2Apv yCAEn5qM1SmR2dWcOGC1dWWKhZ6Ad3jcJ9nY9NK+QEXtvW+lLXmc1JTukLPnx9z7vItJ 00C48Wgi7iFDOJH7AI6laRXrfgCsf/WWzhoUAbAZesf8y9AfjLoljmUS7H/3d02qiF+h 4GYdKbA5ZlagSUA6ASRP8APyu29omdgTgO+eaPefDwcK5k/rHynzWR3BLQLnVEFBl1Mr lfxw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=mVf31krBy6prvTo0LWu1OqIkglhiMn/rcMr98D8eCV4=; b=ChKaOBbtliB4BFzTEc5XAanDMBNf8kHEK7j80AC6M11vww6ULzBJtZKSvu0EaLrp1l 3uFcArIpHktR8w3eKbLGpXaEnja4bOlvDdUbycXW/FGa53c2Z9AUHFUwLLRebneW+U8D PF9n0DScXZEWmD58yseP4lagB/YMhJU837RGD3tNRDjfflE95XvmaeF6vP52lwEIv+Ae LFY2JOkeW9D4XM166zXtRCC28b13I9ifC4ECvpxiZC0HrXhCiMNOmtFBgByzSnntyh1x A2VaA9IXGZzHm/1uQIR9pIAMGYYHBs3HZOC1U+38oHPZ5RSfLzNESyTbupgBqwMK5Ff/ mKYQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 2si1070274pfk.291.2018.04.11.09.39.16; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753106AbeDKQgf (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:36:35 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:44953 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751491AbeDKQge (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2018 12:36:34 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E48FBAFBD; Wed, 11 Apr 2018 16:36:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 18:36:31 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Jann Horn Cc: Michael Kerrisk , John Hubbard , Andrew Morton , Linux-MM , LKML , Linux API Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmap.2: document new MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE flag Message-ID: <20180411163631.GL23400@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20180411120452.1736-1-mhocko@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed 11-04-18 17:37:46, Jann Horn wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:04 PM, wrote: > > From: Michal Hocko > > > > 4.17+ kernels offer a new MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE flag which allows the caller to > > atomicaly probe for a given address range. > > > > [wording heavily updated by John Hubbard ] > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko > > --- > > Hi, > > Andrew's sent the MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE to Linus for the upcoming merge > > window. So here we go with the man page update. > > > > man2/mmap.2 | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/man2/mmap.2 b/man2/mmap.2 > > index ea64eb8f0dcc..f702f3e4eba2 100644 > > --- a/man2/mmap.2 > > +++ b/man2/mmap.2 > > @@ -261,6 +261,27 @@ Examples include > > and the PAM libraries > > .UR http://www.linux-pam.org > > .UE . > > +Newer kernels > > +(Linux 4.17 and later) have a > > +.B MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE > > +option that avoids the corruption problem; if available, MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE > > +should be preferred over MAP_FIXED. > > This still looks wrong to me. There are legitimate uses for MAP_FIXED, > and for most users of MAP_FIXED that I'm aware of, MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE > wouldn't work while MAP_FIXED works perfectly well. > > MAP_FIXED is for when you have already reserved the targeted memory > area using another VMA; MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE is for when you haven't. > Please don't make it sound as if MAP_FIXED is always wrong. Well, this was suggested by John. I think, nobody is objecting that MAP_FIXED has legitimate usecases. The above text just follows up on the previous section which emphasises the potential memory corruption problems and it suggests that a new flag is safe with that regards. If you have specific wording that would be better I am open for changes. > > +.TP > > +.BR MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE " (since Linux 4.17)" > > +Similar to MAP_FIXED with respect to the > > +.I > > +addr > > +enforcement, but different in that MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE never clobbers a pre-existing > > +mapped range. If the requested range would collide with an existing > > +mapping, then this call fails with > > +.B EEXIST. > > +This flag can therefore be used as a way to atomically (with respect to other > > +threads) attempt to map an address range: one thread will succeed; all others > > +will report failure. Please note that older kernels which do not recognize this > > +flag will typically (upon detecting a collision with a pre-existing mapping) > > +fall back to a "non-MAP_FIXED" type of behavior: they will return an address that > > +is different than the requested one. Therefore, backward-compatible software > > +should check the returned address against the requested address. > > .TP > > .B MAP_GROWSDOWN > > This flag is used for stacks. > > @@ -487,6 +508,12 @@ is not a valid file descriptor (and > > .B MAP_ANONYMOUS > > was not set). > > .TP > > +.B EEXIST > > +range covered by > > +.IR addr , > > +.IR length > > +is clashing with an existing mapping. > > Maybe add something like ", and MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE was specified"? I > think most manpages explicitly document which error conditions can be > triggered by which flags. sure, no objection from me. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs