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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABi2SkXjN+5iFoBhxk71t3cmunTk-s=rB4T7qo0UQRh17s49PQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABi2SkXjN+5iFoBhxk71t3cmunTk-s=rB4T7qo0UQRh17s49PQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Jeff Xu <jeffxu@chromium.org>
Date:   Mon, 15 May 2023 18:41:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CABi2SkUfsOWKGdFqgXZg=0AcnUj=AOFb9JmYfp=RwDp_5AcH0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: mprotect outbound check.
To:     linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
        Jorge Lucangeli Obes <jorgelo@chromium.org>,
        lstoakes@gmail.com, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, peterx@redhat.com,
        zhangpeng.00@bytedance.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

+ Peter, Lian, Lorenzo

Is this related to this hotfix ?
      mm/mprotect: fix do_mprotect_pkey() return on error


Thanks!

-Jeff


On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 11:00=E2=80=AFAM Jeff Xu <jeffxu@chromium.org> wrot=
e:
>
> Noticed there is a slight change for mprotect between 6.1 and 6.4 RC1
>
> For example:
> Consider the case below:
> 1 mmap(0x5000000, PAGE_SIZE,  ...)
> 2 mprotect(0x5000000, PAGE_SIZE*4, ...)
>
> in 6.1 and before, 2 will fail, and in 6.4 RC1, it will pass.
>
> I know that munmap will accept out-of-bound cases like this (because
> memory is freed anyway).
>
> Is this change intentional ?
>
> Thanks!
> Best regards,
> -Jeff