Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 2 May 2023 19:53:30 +0100
From:   Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>
To:     Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@cornelisnetworks.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
        Christian Benvenuti <benve@cisco.com>,
        Nelson Escobar <neescoba@cisco.com>,
        Bernard Metzler <bmt@zurich.ibm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        Bjorn Topel <bjorn@kernel.org>,
        Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@intel.com>,
        Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@gmail.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>,
        Mika Penttila <mpenttil@redhat.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/3] mm/gup: disallow GUP writing to file-backed
 mappings by default
Message-ID: <92fd5d71-ef9b-4971-944a-2a7bd74b5970@lucifer.local>
References: <cover.1683044162.git.lstoakes@gmail.com>
 <ce86e956-173f-848a-a1f3-f102134ccd94@linux.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ce86e956-173f-848a-a1f3-f102134ccd94@linux.ibm.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 02:45:01PM -0400, Matthew Rosato wrote:
> On 5/2/23 12:34 PM, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > Writing to file-backed mappings which require folio dirty tracking using
> > GUP is a fundamentally broken operation, as kernel write access to GUP
> > mappings do not adhere to the semantics expected by a file system.
> >
> > A GUP caller uses the direct mapping to access the folio, which does not
> > cause write notify to trigger, nor does it enforce that the caller marks
> > the folio dirty.
> >
> > The problem arises when, after an initial write to the folio, writeback
> > results in the folio being cleaned and then the caller, via the GUP
> > interface, writes to the folio again.
> >
> > As a result of the use of this secondary, direct, mapping to the folio no
> > write notify will occur, and if the caller does mark the folio dirty, this
> > will be done so unexpectedly.
> >
> > For example, consider the following scenario:-
> >
> > 1. A folio is written to via GUP which write-faults the memory, notifying
> >    the file system and dirtying the folio.
> > 2. Later, writeback is triggered, resulting in the folio being cleaned and
> >    the PTE being marked read-only.
> > 3. The GUP caller writes to the folio, as it is mapped read/write via the
> >    direct mapping.
> > 4. The GUP caller, now done with the page, unpins it and sets it dirty
> >    (though it does not have to).
> >
> > This change updates both the PUP FOLL_LONGTERM slow and fast APIs. As
> > pin_user_pages_fast_only() does not exist, we can rely on a slightly
> > imperfect whitelisting in the PUP-fast case and fall back to the slow case
> > should this fail.
> >
> > v7:
> > - Fixed very silly bug in writeable_file_mapping_allowed() inverting the
> >   logic.
> > - Removed unnecessary RCU lock code and replaced with adaptation of Peter's
> >   idea.
> > - Removed unnecessary open-coded folio_test_anon() in
> >   folio_longterm_write_pin_allowed() and restructured to generally permit
> >   NULL folio_mapping().
> >
>
> FWIW, I realize you are planning another respin, but I went and tried this version out on s390 -- Now when using a memory backend file and vfio-pci on s390 I see vfio_pin_pages_remote failing consistently.  However, the pin_user_pages_fast(FOLL_WRITE | FOLL_LONGTERM) in kvm_s390_pci_aif_enable will still return positive.
>

Hey thanks very much for checking that :)

This version will unconditionally apply the retriction to non-FOLL_LONGTERM
by mistake (ugh) but vfio_pin_pages_remote() does seem to be setting
FOLL_LONGTERM anyway so this seems a legitimate test.

Interesting the _fast() variant succeeds...

David, Jason et al. can speak more to the ins and outs of these
virtualisation cases which I am not so familiar with, but I wonder if we do
need a flag to provide an exception for VFIO.