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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <46441800c43f029757c70d8386e3112701081503.1534160958.git.yi.z.zhang@linux.intel.com>
 <1534787638.13739.52.camel@intel.com> <89e7bd54-4afa-614d-ec54-49af7928d6c7@intel.com>
 <20180821161657.GA22028@tiger-server>
In-Reply-To: <20180821161657.GA22028@tiger-server>
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Dec 2018 16:10:31 -0800
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4gZ8WBhUZkoUd1m6bCrtKW0EmfWfCtpGULvjfM=yJ9_sg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/1] device-dax: check for vma range while dax_mmap.
To:     Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
        Vishal L Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
        "Zhang, Yu C" <yu.c.zhang@intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>, zwisler@kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, "Zhang, Yi Z" <yi.z.zhang@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 12:38 AM Yi Zhang <yi.z.zhang@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 2018-08-20 at 12:50:31 -0700, Dave Jiang wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 08/20/2018 10:53 AM, Verma, Vishal L wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2018-08-13 at 20:02 +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
> > >> This patch prevents a user mapping an illegal vma range that is larger
> > >> than a dax device physical resource.
> > >>
> > >> When qemu maps the dax device for virtual nvdimm's backend device, the
> > >> v-nvdimm label area is defined at the end of mapped range. By using an
> > >> illegal size that exceeds the range of the device dax, it will trigger a
> > >> fault with qemu.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.z.zhang@linux.intel.com>
> > >> ---
> > >>  drivers/dax/device.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> > >>
> > >
> > > Looks good to me:
> > > Reviewed-by: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>
> >
> > Applied.
> Thanks Dava and Vishal's kindly review. Thank you.

So, it turns out this patch did not get merged for 4.20. I fumbled it
when returning from vacation. However, I'm not sure it is needed. As
long as attempts to access the out-of-range capacity results in SIGBUS
then the implementation is correct. This is similar to the case where
a file is truncated after the vma is established. That size is
validated at fault time.

Could you be clearer about why this is a problem? The fault sounds
like the correct result.