While it's not strictly necessary to lock a newly created vma before
adding it into the vma tree (as long as no further changes are performed
to it), it seems like a good policy to lock it and prevent accidental
changes after it becomes visible to the page faults. Lock the vma before
adding it into the vma tree.
Suggested-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>
---
mm/mmap.c | 7 +++++--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
index 3937479d0e07..850a39dee075 100644
--- a/mm/mmap.c
+++ b/mm/mmap.c
@@ -412,6 +412,8 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
if (vma_iter_prealloc(&vmi))
return -ENOMEM;
+ vma_start_write(vma);
+
if (vma->vm_file) {
mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
@@ -477,7 +479,8 @@ static inline void vma_prepare(struct vma_prepare *vp)
vma_start_write(vp->vma);
if (vp->adj_next)
vma_start_write(vp->adj_next);
- /* vp->insert is always a newly created VMA, no need for locking */
+ if (vp->insert)
+ vma_start_write(vp->insert);
if (vp->remove)
vma_start_write(vp->remove);
if (vp->remove2)
@@ -3098,6 +3101,7 @@ static int do_brk_flags(struct vma_iterator *vmi, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
vma->vm_pgoff = addr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
vm_flags_init(vma, flags);
vma->vm_page_prot = vm_get_page_prot(flags);
+ vma_start_write(vma);
if (vma_iter_store_gfp(vmi, vma, GFP_KERNEL))
goto mas_store_fail;
@@ -3345,7 +3349,6 @@ struct vm_area_struct *copy_vma(struct vm_area_struct **vmap,
get_file(new_vma->vm_file);
if (new_vma->vm_ops && new_vma->vm_ops->open)
new_vma->vm_ops->open(new_vma);
- vma_start_write(new_vma);
if (vma_link(mm, new_vma))
goto out_vma_link;
*need_rmap_locks = false;
--
2.41.0.585.gd2178a4bd4-goog
@akpm can you fix this up?
On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 5:27 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> While it's not strictly necessary to lock a newly created vma before
> adding it into the vma tree (as long as no further changes are performed
> to it), it seems like a good policy to lock it and prevent accidental
> changes after it becomes visible to the page faults. Lock the vma before
> adding it into the vma tree.
>
> Suggested-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>
> ---
> mm/mmap.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
> index 3937479d0e07..850a39dee075 100644
> --- a/mm/mmap.c
> +++ b/mm/mmap.c
> @@ -412,6 +412,8 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> if (vma_iter_prealloc(&vmi))
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> + vma_start_write(vma);
> +
> if (vma->vm_file) {
> mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
Something went wrong when this part of the patch was applied, because
of a conflict with "mm/mmap: move vma operations to mm_struct out of
the critical section of file mapping lock"; see how this patch ended
up in the mm tree:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git/commit/?id=26cb4dafc13871ab68a4fb480ca1e19381cff392
> @@ -403,6 +403,8 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>
> vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
>
> + vma_start_write(vma);
> +
> if (vma->vm_file) {
> mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
The "vma_start_write()" has to be ordered before the
"vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma)".
On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 16:54:01 +0200 Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
> > @@ -403,6 +403,8 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> >
> > vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> >
> > + vma_start_write(vma);
> > +
> > if (vma->vm_file) {
> > mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> > i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
>
> The "vma_start_write()" has to be ordered before the
> "vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma)".
Thanks. This?
--- a/mm/mmap.c~mm-always-lock-new-vma-before-inserting-into-vma-tree-fix
+++ a/mm/mmap.c
@@ -401,10 +401,10 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm
if (vma_iter_prealloc(&vmi, vma))
return -ENOMEM;
- vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
-
vma_start_write(vma);
+ vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
+
if (vma->vm_file) {
mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
_
On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 9:15 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 16:54:01 +0200 Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
>
> > > @@ -403,6 +403,8 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> > >
> > > vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> > >
> > > + vma_start_write(vma);
> > > +
> > > if (vma->vm_file) {
> > > mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> > > i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
> >
> > The "vma_start_write()" has to be ordered before the
> > "vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma)".
>
> Thanks. This?
>
>
> --- a/mm/mmap.c~mm-always-lock-new-vma-before-inserting-into-vma-tree-fix
> +++ a/mm/mmap.c
> @@ -401,10 +401,10 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm
> if (vma_iter_prealloc(&vmi, vma))
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> -
> vma_start_write(vma);
>
> + vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> +
> if (vma->vm_file) {
> mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
Yes, thanks, that looks good.
On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 1:02 PM Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 9:15 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 16:54:01 +0200 Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > @@ -403,6 +403,8 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> > > >
> > > > vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> > > >
> > > > + vma_start_write(vma);
> > > > +
> > > > if (vma->vm_file) {
> > > > mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> > > > i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
> > >
> > > The "vma_start_write()" has to be ordered before the
> > > "vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma)".
> >
> > Thanks. This?
> >
> >
> > --- a/mm/mmap.c~mm-always-lock-new-vma-before-inserting-into-vma-tree-fix
> > +++ a/mm/mmap.c
> > @@ -401,10 +401,10 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm
> > if (vma_iter_prealloc(&vmi, vma))
> > return -ENOMEM;
> >
> > - vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> > -
> > vma_start_write(vma);
> >
> > + vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> > +
> > if (vma->vm_file) {
> > mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> > i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
>
> Yes, thanks, that looks good.
Ack. Thanks!
* Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> [230814 15:15]:
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 16:54:01 +0200 Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
>
> > > @@ -403,6 +403,8 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> > >
> > > vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> > >
> > > + vma_start_write(vma);
> > > +
> > > if (vma->vm_file) {
> > > mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> > > i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
> >
> > The "vma_start_write()" has to be ordered before the
> > "vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma)".
>
> Thanks. This?
Yes, this looks good.
>
>
> --- a/mm/mmap.c~mm-always-lock-new-vma-before-inserting-into-vma-tree-fix
> +++ a/mm/mmap.c
> @@ -401,10 +401,10 @@ static int vma_link(struct mm_struct *mm
> if (vma_iter_prealloc(&vmi, vma))
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> -
> vma_start_write(vma);
>
> + vma_iter_store(&vmi, vma);
> +
> if (vma->vm_file) {
> mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> i_mmap_lock_write(mapping);
> _
>
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.