From: Tiwei Bie <tiwei.bie@linux.dev>
To: benjamin@sipsolutions.net
Cc: richard@nod.at, anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com,
johannes@sipsolutions.net, arnd@arndb.de,
linux-um@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tiwei.btw@antgroup.com, tiwei.bie@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/10] um: Turn signals_* into thread-local variables
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 21:27:53 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250912132753.2651038-1-tiwei.bie@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <250234d1acd54553bf5f55972d9b05cfccb2cfab.camel@sipsolutions.net>
On Fri, 12 Sep 2025 09:58:49 +0200, Benjamin Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-09-12 at 08:30 +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Sep 2025 10:06:53 +0200, Benjamin Berg wrote:
> >
> > > [SNIP]
> > > That said, I do believe that the allocations from the libc itself are
> > > problematic. A lot of the mappings from UML are there already (i.e. the
> > > physical memory is mapped). However, I believe the vmalloc area for
> > > example is not guarded.
> > >
> > > So when pthread allocates the thread specific memory (stack, TLS, ...),
> > > we really do not know where this will be mapped into the address space.
> > > If it happens to be in an area that UML wants to use later, then UML
> > > could map e.g. vmalloc data over it.
> > >
> > > Now, it could be that (currently) the addresses picked by pthread (or
> > > the host kernel) do not actually clash with anything. However, I do not
> > > think there is any guarantee for that.
> >
> > Indeed. The mmap from libc (pthread, shared libs, ...) can potentially
> > conflict with UML. The reason it has been working on x86_64 so far might
> > be that we did this in linux_main():
> >
> > task_size = task_size & PGDIR_MASK;
> >
> > The current layout is:
> >
> > shared libs and pthreads are located at 7ffxxxxxxxxx
> > TASK_SIZE = 7f8000000000
> > VMALLOC_END = 7f7fffffe000 (which is TASK_SIZE-2*PAGE_SIZE)
>
> Uh, right, yes. Because of the masking we are capping ourselves to
> 0x7f8000000000. And then all of the interesting bits (vdso, ...) happen
> to be mapped above that address and are effectively protected. And,
> there is also plenty of space for other allocations technically.
>
> That is kind of horrible, as it only works because all of this happens
> to be mapped into the top of the address space.
+1.
> But, maybe something to
> just wilfully ignore and only fix as part of a nolibc port?
Sure. Thanks!
Regards,
Tiwei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-12 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-10 5:51 [PATCH v2 00/10] um: Add SMP support Tiwei Bie
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 01/10] um: Stop tracking virtual CPUs via mm_cpumask() Tiwei Bie
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 02/10] um: Remove unused cpu_data and current_cpu_data macros Tiwei Bie
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 03/10] um: vdso: Implement __vdso_getcpu() via syscall Tiwei Bie
2025-09-10 11:59 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-11 4:29 ` Tiwei Bie
2025-09-21 20:00 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-09-22 4:50 ` Tiwei Bie
2025-09-22 12:05 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-09-22 12:12 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-22 14:01 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-09-22 15:14 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-22 16:04 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-09-22 17:07 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-25 17:08 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-21 13:20 ` Johannes Berg
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 04/10] um: Turn signals_* into thread-local variables Tiwei Bie
2025-09-10 12:15 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-11 4:34 ` Tiwei Bie
2025-09-11 7:37 ` Benjamin Berg
2025-09-11 8:06 ` Benjamin Berg
2025-09-12 0:30 ` Tiwei Bie
2025-09-12 7:58 ` Benjamin Berg
2025-09-12 13:27 ` Tiwei Bie [this message]
2025-09-11 9:44 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-11 10:35 ` Benjamin Berg
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 05/10] um: Determine sleep based on need_resched() Tiwei Bie
2025-09-10 12:10 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-11 4:39 ` Tiwei Bie
2025-09-11 6:59 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-12 0:59 ` Tiwei Bie
2025-09-11 9:27 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-12 0:54 ` Tiwei Bie
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 06/10] um: Define timers on a per-CPU basis Tiwei Bie
2025-08-10 9:49 ` kernel test robot
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 07/10] um: Remove unused ipi_pipe field from cpuinfo_um Tiwei Bie
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 08/10] um: Add initial SMP support Tiwei Bie
2025-09-11 9:32 ` Johannes Berg
2025-09-12 0:45 ` Tiwei Bie
2025-09-12 7:58 ` Johannes Berg
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 09/10] asm-generic: percpu: Add assembly guard Tiwei Bie
2025-09-10 12:12 ` Johannes Berg
2025-08-10 5:51 ` [PATCH v2 10/10] um: Enable SMP support on x86 Tiwei Bie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250912132753.2651038-1-tiwei.bie@linux.dev \
--to=tiwei.bie@linux.dev \
--cc=anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=benjamin@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-um@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=tiwei.btw@antgroup.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®