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 kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFEFDC433EF for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 17:54:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 4BB1E6B0072; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 12:54:40 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 46B626B0073; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 12:54:40 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 332206B0074; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 12:54:40 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0234.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.234]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2095C6B0072 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 12:54:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin21.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFF96812C196 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 17:54:39 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79047786678.21.A8F38AB Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk (pandora.armlinux.org.uk [78.32.30.218]) by imf22.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16C54C0022 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 17:54:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armlinux.org.uk; s=pandora-2019; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=unKRq3+Qh51MnwlGbQRTSZfvWAAVcrjJNDrQsffLRoE=; b=lNv2TQPpQwY5mfxhjvKLg2EDRL AMKBR9MGe26Y3fMyV7upvAJT43SQwAkrYb+v+weXlBuwJ3Gy3NYyhiA9Esr3pWTbrLwIvCe/qdhiO 58Rw0c+QHTeTnrVq+bx1Ru2KW2Ex2tjmGPBZtmJpE/NUzjxYNaF6P+HpJ9/ZmNDn332pawnjX7op4 /S220jgMQFz4Latm8e09vHZjfT15DP3gxNlRgtRu+kBm4LOM9t0C/2MiwYAZh1JIVAPycdUuRWmpv NkRkDkNPlLqD/XZdQb+tw4Js0Tzz6cbJguLjszXZ84kKZCfATnIRKkoE5mZ+ihZkDmXKdymGZ2YI+ ZPxjWimg==; Received: from shell.armlinux.org.uk ([fd8f:7570:feb6:1:5054:ff:fe00:4ec]:56780) by pandora.armlinux.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nAFA4-000502-HE; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 17:54:20 +0000 Received: from linux by shell.armlinux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nAF9z-0005Rq-9b; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 17:54:15 +0000 Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 17:54:15 +0000 From: "Russell King (Oracle)" To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Robin Murphy , Yury Norov , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Andrew Morton , Nicholas Piggin , Ding Tianhong , Anshuman Khandual , Alexey Klimov , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmap(): don't allow invalid pages Message-ID: References: <20220118235244.540103-1-yury.norov@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 16C54C0022 X-Stat-Signature: 3g7hu3jedoqdmh64ptb874bqxo6ancn1 Authentication-Results: imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=armlinux.org.uk header.s=pandora-2019 header.b=lNv2TQPp; spf=none (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of "linux+linux-mm=kvack.org@armlinux.org.uk" has no SPF policy when checking 78.32.30.218) smtp.mailfrom="linux+linux-mm=kvack.org@armlinux.org.uk"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=armlinux.org.uk X-HE-Tag: 1642614878-466905 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 04:27:32PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 01:28:14PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > > > + if (WARN_ON(!pfn_valid(page_to_pfn(page)))) > > > > Is it page_to_pfn() guaranteed to work without blowing up if page is invalid > > in the first place? Looking at the CONFIG_SPARSEMEM case I'm not sure that's > > true... > > Even if it does blow up, at least it's blowing up here where someone > can start to debug it, rather than blowing up on first access, where > we no longer have the invlid struct page pointer. > > I don't think we have a 'page_valid' function which will tell us whether > a random pointer is actually a struct page or not. Isn't it supposed to be: if (!pfn_valid(pfn)) { handle invalid pfn; } page = pfn_to_page(pfn); Anything else - even trying to convert an invalid page back to a pfn, could well be unreliable (sparsemem or discontigmem). -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!