Linux Security Modules development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "yao zhang1" <yao.zhang1@amlogic.com>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org,
	ebpqwerty472123@gmail.com, paul@paul-moore.com,
	stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15.y] mm: call the security_mmap_file() LSM hook in remap_file_pages()
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2026 08:07:44 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-188948@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261028080719.1821-1-yao.zhang1@amlogic.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] mm: lock inversion in remap_file_pages() calling security_mmap_file()
--

commit 78749fa17008059030caa915f2db592fbe2d9fa2
Author: Shu Han <ebpqwerty472123@gmail.com>

mm: call the security_mmap_file() LSM hook in remap_file_pages()

This commit adds a call to security_mmap_file() in remap_file_pages() before
invoking do_mmap() so that LSM policies such as SELinux W^X checks cannot be
bypassed when READ_IMPLIES_EXEC is set in the process personality.

Link: https://project-zero.issues.chromium.org/issues/42452389 [1]

> diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
> index 273e06dad3c6f..7f357de8f4d68 100644
> --- a/mm/mmap.c
> +++ b/mm/mmap.c
> @@ -3047,8 +3047,12 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(remap_file_pages, unsigned long, start, unsigned long, size,
>  		flags |= MAP_LOCKED;
>  
>  	file = get_file(vma->vm_file);
> +	ret = security_mmap_file(vma->vm_file, prot, flags);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto out_fput;

[Severity: High]
Does calling security_mmap_file() here while holding mm->mmap_lock introduce a
lock inversion with inode->i_rwsem?

In mm/mmap.c, SYSCALL_DEFINE5(remap_file_pages) acquires mm->mmap_lock for
write before looking up the VMA and holds it across this call:

mm/mmap.c:SYSCALL_DEFINE5(remap_file_pages) {
	if (mmap_write_lock_killable(mm))
		return -EINTR;
	...
	file = get_file(vma->vm_file);
	ret = security_mmap_file(vma->vm_file, prot, flags);
}

However, security_mmap_file() in security/security.c computes the adjusted
protection flags (which includes PROT_EXEC when VM_EXEC is present or when
VM_READ is present with READ_IMPLIES_EXEC set in current->personality) and
calls ima_file_mmap() -> process_measurement() in
security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c:

security/security.c:security_mmap_file()
  -> security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c:ima_file_mmap()
    -> security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c:process_measurement() {
	...
	inode_lock(inode);
    }

When an IMA measurement or appraisal policy applies to the file,
process_measurement() acquires inode->i_rwsem (as well as iint->mutex) while
mm->mmap_lock is already held.

As documented in the lock ordering comment in mm/rmap.c, inode->i_rwsem ranks
outside mm->mmap_lock (for example, generic_file_write_iter() ->
generic_perform_write() in mm/filemap.c holds inode_lock(inode) while faulting
in user pages under mm->mmap_lock). Other callers such as vm_mmap_pgoff() in
mm/util.c and do_shmat() in ipc/shm.c invoke security_mmap_file() outside
mm->mmap_lock for this reason (see commit 8b3ec6814c83).

Can a concurrent buffered write or truncate on the same file deadlock against
remap_file_pages() when IMA is enabled?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261028080719.1821-1-yao.zhang1@amlogic.com?part=1

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-29  8:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-28  8:07 [PATCH 5.15.y] mm: call the security_mmap_file() LSM hook in remap_file_pages() yao zhang1
2026-10-29  8:07 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-10-28  7:42 yao zhang1
2026-10-29  7:43 ` sashiko-bot

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=sashiko-outbox-188948@kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=ebpqwerty472123@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=yao.zhang1@amlogic.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