Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1753859Ab0AZClN@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753859Ab0AZClN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 25 Jan 2010 21:41:13 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753575Ab0AZClL
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Mon, 25 Jan 2010 21:41:11 -0500
Received: from fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.37]:54530 "EHLO
	fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751314Ab0AZClK (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 25 Jan 2010 21:41:10 -0500
X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: futex() on vdso makes process unkillable
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
       Mark Seaborn <mrs@mythic-beasts.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
       "hugh.dickins" <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <4B5DD6DF.4090102@us.ibm.com>
References: <1264411574.4283.1632.camel@laptop> <4B5DD6DF.4090102@us.ibm.com>
Message-Id: <20100126113312.5AA3.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.50.07 [ja]
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:41:05 +0900 (JST)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2615
Lines: 59

> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 16:27 +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> <snip>
> >> Futex should work both file anon anon. however I personally think 
> >> vdso is not file nor anon. it is special mappings. nobody defined
> >> futex spec on special mappings. (yes, undefined).
> >>
> >> Personally, I think EINVAL or EFAULT are best result of vdso futexing, like as
> >> futexing againt kernel address. but I guess another person have another thinking.
> >>
> >> I'd like to hear futex folks's opinion.
> > 
> > Well, my opinion is we should remove the vdso, its ugly as hell :-)
> > 
> > But I think it would make most sense to extend its definition in the
> > direction of it being a file (for all intents and purposes its a special
> > DSO -- which unfortunately isn't present in any filesystem).
> > 
> > [ For all intents and purposes processes can already communicate through
> > futexes on the libc space, so being able to do so through the vsdo
> > really doesn't add anything ]
> > 
> > So the problem is that the VDSO pages do not have a page->mapping
> > because they lack the actual filesystem part of files, so even if (with
> > the recent zero-page patch from Kosaki-san) you make private COWs of the
> > VDSO, you'll get stuck in that loop.
> > 
> > So the prettiest solution is to simply place the vdso in an actual
> > filesystem and slowly migrate towards letting userspace map it as a
> > regular DSO -- /sys/lib{32,64}/libkernel.so like.
> > 
> > [ that has the bonus of getting rid of install_special_mapping() ]
> > 
> > The ugly solution is special casing the vdso in get_futex_key().
> 
> I like the creating-a-real-file solution. However, for now (and for 
> stable), I think Kosaki's suggestion of EINVAL or EFAULT is a good 
> stop-gap. EINVAL might play the best with existing glibc implementations.

May I confirm your mention?

If we can accept EFAULT, we don't need any change. my previous futex patch
already did. because 1) VDSO is alwasys read-only mapped 2) write mode
get_user_pages_fast() against read-only pte/vma return EFAULT.

Current linus and stable tree don't cause Mark's original problem. instead, just
return EFAULT. (Well, I'm sorry. my previous mail was unclear. I wrote v2.6.31 test
result)

If you can't accept EFAULT, we need to add vdso specific logic into get_futex_key().
Is this your intention?



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/