From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754194Ab3KECRV (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 4 Nov 2013 21:17:21 -0500
Received: from LGEMRELSE6Q.lge.com ([156.147.1.121]:54750 "EHLO
	LGEMRELSE6Q.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753935Ab3KECRU (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 4 Nov 2013 21:17:20 -0500
X-AuditID: 9c930179-b7c44ae000000c83-09-5278552d69ee
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>,
        Hyeoncheol Lee <cheol.lee@lge.com>,
        Hemant Kumar <hkshaw@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "zhangwei\(Jovi\)" <jovi.zhangwei@huawei.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] tracing/uprobes: Add more fetch functions
References: <1383029621-7384-1-git-send-email-namhyung@kernel.org>
	<1383029621-7384-13-git-send-email-namhyung@kernel.org>
	<20131031182218.GB11208@redhat.com>
	<87k3go35zm.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com>
	<20131104164431.GA10053@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 11:17:17 +0900
In-Reply-To: <20131104164431.GA10053@redhat.com> (Oleg Nesterov's message of
	"Mon, 4 Nov 2013 17:44:31 +0100")
Message-ID: <87iow71tjm.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 17:44:31 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 11/04, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 19:22:18 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> > On 10/29, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> >>
>> >> +static void __user *get_user_vaddr(unsigned long addr, struct trace_uprobe *tu)
>> >> +{
>> >> +	unsigned long pgoff = addr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>> >> +	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
>> >> +	struct address_space *mapping;
>> >> +	unsigned long vaddr = 0;
>> >> +
>> >> +	if (tu == NULL) {
>> >> +		/* A NULL tu means that we already got the vaddr */
>> >> +		return (void __force __user *) addr;
>> >> +	}
>> >> +
>> >> +	mapping = tu->inode->i_mapping;
>> >> +
>> >> +	mutex_lock(&mapping->i_mmap_mutex);
>> >> +	vma_interval_tree_foreach(vma, &mapping->i_mmap, pgoff, pgoff) {
>> >> +		if (vma->vm_mm != current->mm)
>> >> +			continue;
>> >> +		if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_READ))
>> >> +			continue;
>> >> +
>> >> +		vaddr = offset_to_vaddr(vma, addr);
>> >> +		break;
>> >> +	}
>> >> +	mutex_unlock(&mapping->i_mmap_mutex);
>> >> +
>> >> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(vaddr == 0);
>> >
>> > Hmm. But unless I missed something this "addr" passed as an argument can
>> > be wrong? And if nothing else this or another thread can unmap the vma?
>>
>> You mean WARN_ON_ONCE here is superfluous?  I admit that it should
>> protect concurrent vma [un]mappings.  Please see my reply in other
>> thread for a new approach.
>
> Whatever we do this address can be unmapped. For example, just because of
> @invalid_address passed to trace_uprobe.c.
>
> We do not really care, copy_from_user() should fail. But we should not
> WARN() in this case.

Okay, I see.  Will remove it in the next spin.

Thanks,
Namhyung