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
In-Reply-To: <ca908533-2905-e28a-db3a-c3cf9c98bbed@oracle.com>
References: <20171031184052.25253-1-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
 <20171031184052.25253-5-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <CANq1E4SC8Hi4h9hxUM70+qOL4K95cXuMF9DKGw4dGhfmktrqsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ca908533-2905-e28a-db3a-c3cf9c98bbed@oracle.com>
From:   David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Nov 2017 18:41:50 +0100
Message-ID: <CANq1E4Tb5zuMxwuHFjLBJ==H219ucmO2=V7iM+K7AAuY-iinoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] hugetlbfs: implement memfd sealing
To:     Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc:     =?UTF-8?B?TWFyYy1BbmRyw6kgTHVyZWF1?= <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, aarcange@redhat.com,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, nyc@holomorphy.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> wrot=
e:
> On 11/03/2017 10:03 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau
>> <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> Implements memfd sealing, similar to shmem:
>>> - WRITE: deny fallocate(PUNCH_HOLE). mmap() write is denied in
>>>   memfd_add_seals(). write() doesn't exist for hugetlbfs.
>>> - SHRINK: added similar check as shmem_setattr()
>>> - GROW: added similar check as shmem_setattr() & shmem_fallocate()
>>>
>>> Except write() operation that doesn't exist with hugetlbfs, that
>>> should make sealing as close as it can be to shmem support.
>>
>> SEAL, SHRINK, and GROW look fine to me.
>>
>> Regarding WRITE
>
> The commit message may not be clear.  However, hugetlbfs does not support
> the write system call (or aio).  The only way to modify contents of a
> hugetlbfs file is via mmap or hole punch/truncate.  So, we do not really
> need to worry about those special (a)io cases for hugetlbfs.

This is not about the write(2) syscall. Please consider this scenario
about shmem:

You create a memfd via memfd_create() and map it writable. You now
call another kernel syscall that takes as input _any mapped page
range_. You pass your mapped memfd-addresses to it. Those syscalls
tend to use get_user_pages() to pin arbitrary user-mapped pages, as
such this also affects shmem. In this case, those pages might stay
mapped even if you munmap() your memfd!

One example of this is using AIO-read() on any other file that
supports it, passing your mapped memfd as buffer to _read into_. The
operations supported on the memfd are irrelevant here.
The selftests contain a FUSE-based test for this, since FUSE allows
user-space to GUP pages for an arbitrary amount of time.

The original fix for this is:

    commit 05f65b5c70909ef686f865f0a85406d74d75f70f
    Author: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>
    Date:   Fri Aug 8 14:25:36 2014 -0700

        shm: wait for pins to be released when sealing

Please have a look at this. Your patches use shmem_add_seals() almost
unchanged, and as such you call into shmem_wait_for_pins() on
hugetlbfs. I would really like to see an explicit ACK that this works
on hugetlbfs.

Thanks
David

From 1583065925367281602@xxx Fri Nov 03 17:15:14 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1582799756524927158
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread