From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 156AD6B003D for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:41:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:41:03 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [aarcange@redhat.com: [PATCH] fork vs gup(-fast) fix] Message-ID: <20090311174103.GA11979@elte.hu> References: <20090311170611.GA2079@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Nick Piggin , Hugh Dickins , Andrea Arcangeli , KOSAKI Motohiro , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: * Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > FYI, in case you missed it. Large MM fix - and it's awfully > > late in -rc7. > > Yeah, I'm not taking this at this point. No way, no-how. > > If there is no simpler and obvious fix, it needs to go through > -stable, after having cooked in 2.6.30-rc for a while. > Especially as this is a totally uninteresting usage case that > I can't see as being at all relevant to any real world. > > Anybody who mixes O_DIRECT and fork() (and threads) is already > doing some seriously strange things. Nothing new there. Hm, is there any security impact? Andrea is talking about data corruption. I'm wondering whether that's just corruption relative to whatever twisted semantics O_DIRECT has in this case [which would be harmless], or some true pagecache corruption going across COW (or other) protection domains that could be exploited [which would not be harmless]. Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org