From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Piotr Kwapulinski <kwapulinski.piotr@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the tip tree
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 13:35:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160226133536.0a37978a1de54154db747c49@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160226160712.754b765c@canb.auug.org.au>
On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 16:07:12 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
>
> mm/mprotect.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 62b5f7d013fc ("mm/core, x86/mm/pkeys: Add execute-only protection keys support")
>
> from the tip tree and commit:
>
> aff3915ff831 ("mm/mprotect.c: don't imply PROT_EXEC on non-exec fs")
>
> from the akpm-current tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary
> (no action is required).
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc mm/mprotect.c
> index fa37c4cd973a,6ff5dfa65b33..000000000000
> --- a/mm/mprotect.c
> +++ b/mm/mprotect.c
> @@@ -414,7 -409,11 +411,11 @@@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(mprotect, unsigned long
>
> /* Here we know that vma->vm_start <= nstart < vma->vm_end. */
>
> + /* Does the application expect PROT_READ to imply PROT_EXEC */
> + if (rier && (vma->vm_flags & VM_MAYEXEC))
> + prot |= PROT_EXEC;
> +
> - newflags = calc_vm_prot_bits(prot);
> + newflags = calc_vm_prot_bits(prot, pkey);
> newflags |= (vma->vm_flags & ~(VM_READ | VM_WRITE | VM_EXEC));
>
> /* newflags >> 4 shift VM_MAY% in place of VM_% */
OK, thanks.
I moved this patch
(mm-mprotectc-dont-imply-prot_exec-on-non-exec-fs.patch) into the
"post-linux-next" section and reworked it to accommodate the -tip
changes.
From: Piotr Kwapulinski <kwapulinski.piotr@gmail.com>
Subject: mm/mprotect.c: don't imply PROT_EXEC on non-exec fs
The mprotect(PROT_READ) fails when called by the READ_IMPLIES_EXEC binary
on a memory mapped file located on non-exec fs. The mprotect does not
check whether fs is _executable_ or not. The PROT_EXEC flag is set
automatically even if a memory mapped file is located on non-exec fs. Fix
it by checking whether a memory mapped file is located on a non-exec fs.
If so the PROT_EXEC is not implied by the PROT_READ. The implementation
uses the VM_MAYEXEC flag set properly in mmap. Now it is consistent with
mmap.
I did the isolated tests (PT_GNU_STACK X/NX, multiple VMAs, X/NX fs). I
also patched the official 3.19.0-47-generic Ubuntu 14.04 kernel and it
seems to work.
Signed-off-by: Piotr Kwapulinski <kwapulinski.piotr@gmail.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
mm/mprotect.c | 13 ++++++++-----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff -puN mm/mprotect.c~mm-mprotectc-dont-imply-prot_exec-on-non-exec-fs mm/mprotect.c
--- a/mm/mprotect.c~mm-mprotectc-dont-imply-prot_exec-on-non-exec-fs
+++ a/mm/mprotect.c
@@ -359,6 +359,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(mprotect, unsigned long,
struct vm_area_struct *vma, *prev;
int error = -EINVAL;
const int grows = prot & (PROT_GROWSDOWN|PROT_GROWSUP);
+ const bool rier = (current->personality & READ_IMPLIES_EXEC) &&
+ (prot & PROT_READ);
+
prot &= ~(PROT_GROWSDOWN|PROT_GROWSUP);
if (grows == (PROT_GROWSDOWN|PROT_GROWSUP)) /* can't be both */
return -EINVAL;
@@ -375,11 +378,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(mprotect, unsigned long,
return -EINVAL;
reqprot = prot;
- /*
- * Does the application expect PROT_READ to imply PROT_EXEC:
- */
- if ((prot & PROT_READ) && (current->personality & READ_IMPLIES_EXEC))
- prot |= PROT_EXEC;
down_write(¤t->mm->mmap_sem);
@@ -414,6 +412,10 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(mprotect, unsigned long,
/* Here we know that vma->vm_start <= nstart < vma->vm_end. */
+ /* Does the application expect PROT_READ to imply PROT_EXEC */
+ if (rier && (vma->vm_flags & VM_MAYEXEC))
+ prot |= PROT_EXEC;
+
newflags = calc_vm_prot_bits(prot, pkey);
newflags |= (vma->vm_flags & ~(VM_READ | VM_WRITE | VM_EXEC));
@@ -445,6 +447,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(mprotect, unsigned long,
error = -ENOMEM;
goto out;
}
+ prot = reqprot;
}
out:
up_write(¤t->mm->mmap_sem);
_
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-26 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 112+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-26 5:07 linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the tip tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-26 21:35 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-02-16 5:38 Stephen Rothwell
2021-10-07 6:27 Stephen Rothwell
2021-03-22 6:12 Stephen Rothwell
2020-12-11 8:56 Stephen Rothwell
2020-12-11 12:47 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-11-27 7:48 Stephen Rothwell
2020-11-27 7:39 Stephen Rothwell
2020-11-27 11:54 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-11-30 9:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-11-23 8:05 Stephen Rothwell
2020-11-09 6:00 Stephen Rothwell
2020-10-13 6:59 Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-17 10:19 Stephen Rothwell
2020-05-29 11:05 Stephen Rothwell
2020-05-29 10:18 Stephen Rothwell
2020-05-29 10:05 Stephen Rothwell
2020-05-29 9:58 Stephen Rothwell
2020-05-25 11:04 Stephen Rothwell
2020-05-26 4:41 ` Singh, Balbir
2020-06-03 4:43 ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-05-19 16:18 Stephen Rothwell
2020-03-25 7:48 Stephen Rothwell
2020-03-19 6:42 Stephen Rothwell
2020-01-20 6:37 Stephen Rothwell
2020-01-20 6:30 Stephen Rothwell
2019-10-31 5:43 Stephen Rothwell
2019-06-24 10:24 Stephen Rothwell
2019-05-01 11:10 Stephen Rothwell
2019-01-31 4:31 Stephen Rothwell
2018-08-20 4:32 Stephen Rothwell
2018-08-20 19:52 ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-23 5:59 Stephen Rothwell
2017-12-18 5:04 Stephen Rothwell
2017-11-10 4:33 Stephen Rothwell
2017-11-02 7:19 Stephen Rothwell
2017-08-22 6:57 Stephen Rothwell
2017-08-23 6:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-08-11 7:53 Stephen Rothwell
2017-08-11 9:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-11 10:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-11 11:45 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-08-11 11:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-08-11 12:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-11 12:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-08-11 13:49 ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-08-11 14:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-13 6:06 ` Nadav Amit
2017-08-13 12:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-14 3:16 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-14 5:07 ` Nadav Amit
2017-08-14 5:23 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-14 8:38 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-14 19:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-16 4:14 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-14 19:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-15 7:51 ` Nadav Amit
2017-08-14 3:09 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-14 18:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-12 6:46 Stephen Rothwell
2017-04-12 20:53 ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-04-20 2:17 ` NeilBrown
2017-03-24 5:25 Stephen Rothwell
2017-02-17 4:40 Stephen Rothwell
2016-11-14 6:08 Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-29 4:14 Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-15 5:23 Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-18 19:39 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-04-29 6:12 Stephen Rothwell
2016-04-29 6:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-02 5:40 Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-19 4:09 Stephen Rothwell
2016-02-19 15:26 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-12-07 8:06 Stephen Rothwell
2015-10-02 4:21 Stephen Rothwell
2015-07-28 6:00 Stephen Rothwell
2015-07-29 17:12 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2015-07-29 17:47 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-29 18:46 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-07-30 15:38 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2015-07-29 23:06 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-07-29 23:07 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-09-07 23:35 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-09-08 18:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-09-08 22:56 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-09-08 23:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-09-08 23:21 ` Andrew Morton
2015-09-16 6:58 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-06-04 12:07 Stephen Rothwell
2015-04-08 8:28 Stephen Rothwell
2015-04-08 8:25 Stephen Rothwell
2014-03-17 9:31 Stephen Rothwell
2014-03-17 9:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-19 23:27 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-14 4:53 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-14 5:04 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-01-14 12:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-14 13:17 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-14 13:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-14 16:19 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-01-14 15:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-01-14 15:20 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-01-14 15:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-14 15:48 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-01-07 6:00 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-07 6:34 ` Tang Chen
2013-11-08 7:48 Stephen Rothwell
2013-11-08 18:58 ` Josh Triplett
2013-11-08 23:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-11-09 0:19 ` Josh Triplett
2013-10-30 6:40 Stephen Rothwell
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=20160226133536.0a37978a1de54154db747c49@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kwapulinski.piotr@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).