From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F625C3DA7A for ; Mon, 2 Jan 2023 13:23:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232468AbjABNXR (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jan 2023 08:23:17 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34930 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231716AbjABNXN (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jan 2023 08:23:13 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 460B9634E for ; Mon, 2 Jan 2023 05:22:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1672665750; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=E5JT1kd37IuRGEL37nkEW4w2qEUZx756Pop0OedkJgo=; b=AMkFOpSv6jDdI0TFSZ7XpRcRTaKPc1WvXwkfH61CR1WvVQQ8ucFBk1rM2RCVdS7+B4Z0jQ r8EQvZ4XybjJSZ9lgfw6nosbTUzRZvVVHaOb/8tD2qqU2HD/gzAaU2/rpfg9sBPh+dR8Sj 8dd4GrVI1UkWRY3J1XxTIcP/WAU++9w= Received: from mail-wm1-f72.google.com (mail-wm1-f72.google.com [209.85.128.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-201-lLlG-KwyO7WNKUm-7wN3ZQ-1; Mon, 02 Jan 2023 08:22:29 -0500 X-MC-Unique: lLlG-KwyO7WNKUm-7wN3ZQ-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f72.google.com with SMTP id l17-20020a05600c1d1100b003d9a145366cso4943599wms.4 for ; Mon, 02 Jan 2023 05:22:29 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:organization:from:references :cc:to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=E5JT1kd37IuRGEL37nkEW4w2qEUZx756Pop0OedkJgo=; b=zveQM29+OwSISaV0gZERPCZOcED6VK67vTqkP5+wDF6kwnlV943zZZG4bctWDzkjLi ywEWWNqlGOHhGebZM1XzgWtBBudcxq/ZHHsFHbu8lCgOLZA1QpPetKpzkcnxZOBdl5pC cm986Su6vOqoFa9qW+ocggTm99ldIfXjtJh5qaXyB4EPSXW9XmKmvc2DKYKEJ/gjIIRL 6BX+oVMcQ5kMDp+Hp/IAYzJxcMU11NJ4VyMYJjqUWvFa1nWM0Ij/Rum/yFA/HDPIegkv gpnZh13yC9Kg+bo/Ab/t34Zfpuupwq6VCBzdfmV7F8FEavOViyRu24SDHpsPR62ZFuda 31zA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2krvlMcJQoSfpNLpODtw/jlmNMVXOZ+6azo90nbyzTlrHTFsaLrx 3Q3nG2M09i0In5XaZ4FUVRhJLfEOBgXt27CYKHbBUjkSTa9LKqlFMMeKkZHnDpVqeAaXL0A8Mgh 2sNx63MHYwQmidjxIUUzCh4uQ X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3b29:b0:3cf:d18e:528b with SMTP id m41-20020a05600c3b2900b003cfd18e528bmr29332208wms.39.1672665747832; Mon, 02 Jan 2023 05:22:27 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXt1MMvvBh79Ous21PvG7yDllmYOOsPELrmqqGxs09MXsS8a6IvY3cauQUjOIhzB4QrCR3A1cg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3b29:b0:3cf:d18e:528b with SMTP id m41-20020a05600c3b2900b003cfd18e528bmr29332197wms.39.1672665747575; Mon, 02 Jan 2023 05:22:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2003:cb:c703:500:9382:2e5a:fea:8889? (p200300cbc703050093822e5a0fea8889.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:cb:c703:500:9382:2e5a:fea:8889]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p19-20020a1c5453000000b003d2157627a8sm42233921wmi.47.2023.01.02.05.22.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Jan 2023 05:22:27 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2023 14:22:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] return EINVAL for illegal user memory range Content-Language: en-US To: Wupeng Ma , akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kuleshovmail@gmail.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, clameter@sgi.com References: <20221205034108.3365182-1-mawupeng1@huawei.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: <20221205034108.3365182-1-mawupeng1@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05.12.22 04:41, Wupeng Ma wrote: > From: Ma Wupeng > > While testing mlock, we have a problem if the len of mlock is ULONG_MAX. > The return value of mlock is zero. But nothing will be locked since the > len in do_mlock overflows to zero due to the following code in mlock: > > len = PAGE_ALIGN(len + (offset_in_page(start))); > > However this problem appear in multiple syscalls. > > Since TASK_SIZE is the maximum user space address. The start or len of > mlock shouldn't be bigger than this. Function access_ok can be used to > check this issue, so return -EINVAL if bigger. I assume this makes sure that what we document holds: EINVAL (mlock(), mlock2(), and munlock()) The result of the addition addr+len was less than addr (e.g., the addition may have resulted in an overflow). So instead of adding access_ok() checks, wouldn't be the right think to do checking for overflows? -- Thanks, David / dhildenb