Re: Bugs on your remap_file_pages protections implementations

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Blaisorblade <blaisorblade@yahoo.it> wrote:

> Hi Ingo, I'm the young UML hacker you met at OLS and who got your UML 
> patches sent ;-)
> 
> I've been studying your patch (and the whole Linux VM, indeed) in the 
> past days, and I have some remarks, about the version of the code in 
> 2.6.4-rc2-mm1 (which is the same you sent me) - I've now downloaded 
> the version dropped from 2.6.5-mm1, but it doesn't seem to address 
> those problems.
> 
> Btw, I've now seen why that patch was dropped, but not why it wasn't 
> resubmit.

was not resubmitted due to me only having 30 hours available to hack, 
per day ;) Feel free to pick the patch up.

> *) with your patch, remapped pages without MAP_INHERIT are IMHO not 
> safe across swapout; re-swapping them in will pass through the 
> arch-specific fault handler, which will check VMA's protections, and 
> fail if the VMA originally had MAP_NONE. Or am I missing something?

not sure, was a long time ago. I have checked swap-safeness, but only 
once. UML did work though, but i dont think i ever pushed it into 
swapping out its RAM-file.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/