From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: introduce MAP_FIXED_SAFE
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 16:19:52 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jKGsAjwF7nE_vjaWPnG0QJRx_qFeiSBLRg_g73iUJ-pwA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20171129144219.22867-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <CAGXu5jLa=b2HhjWXXTQunaZuz11qUhm5aNXHpS26jVqb=G-gfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171130065835.dbw4ajh5q5whikhf@dhcp22.suse.cz> <87zi6we9z2.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
 <a3b3129a-2626-a65e-59b0-68aada523723@prevas.dk> <20171206090803.GG16386@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Return-path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
In-Reply-To: <20171206090803.GG16386@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>, Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@oracle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>, John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>, Abdul Haleem <abdhalee@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Wed 06-12-17 08:33:37, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>> On 2017-12-06 05:50, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> > Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> writes:
>> >
>> >> On Wed 29-11-17 14:25:36, Kees Cook wrote:
>> >> It is safe in a sense it doesn't perform any address space dangerous
>> >> operations. mmap is _inherently_ about the address space so the context
>> >> should be kind of clear.
>> >
>> > So now you have to define what "dangerous" means.
>> >
>> >>> MAP_FIXED_UNIQUE
>> >>> MAP_FIXED_ONCE
>> >>> MAP_FIXED_FRESH
>> >>
>> >> Well, I can open a poll for the best name, but none of those you are
>> >> proposing sound much better to me. Yeah, naming sucks...
>>
>> I also don't like the _SAFE name - MAP_FIXED in itself isn't unsafe [1],
>> but I do agree that having a way to avoid clobbering (parts of) an
>> existing mapping is quite useful. Since we're bikeshedding names, how
>> about MAP_FIXED_EXCL, in analogy with the O_ flag.
>
> I really give up on the name discussion. I will take whatever the
> majority comes up with. I just do not want this (useful) funtionality
> get bikeched to death.

Yup, I really want this to land too. What do people think of Matthew
Wilcox's MAP_REQUIRED ? MAP_EXACT isn't exact, and dropping "FIXED"
out of the middle seems sensible to me.

MIchael, any suggestions with your API hat on?

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>