[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm/gup: protect unpin_user_pages() against npages==-ERRNO
On 9/19/20 8:03 PM, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 1:11 PM Dan Carpenter <> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:57:06PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
>>> As suggested by Dan Carpenter, fortify unpin_user_pages() just a bit,
>>> against a typical caller mistake: check if the npages arg is really a
>>> -ERRNO value, which would blow up the unpinning loop: WARN and return.
>>> If this new WARN_ON() fires, then the system *might* be leaking pages
>>> (by leaving them pinned), but probably not. More likely, gup/pup
>>> returned a hard -ERRNO error to the caller, who erroneously passed it
>>> here.
> Do we need a similar check inside unpin_user_pages_dirty_lock(),
> when make_dirty set to false ?

Maybe not. This call is rarely if ever used for error handling, but
rather, for finishing up a successful use of the pages.

There is a balance between protecting against buggy callers and just
fixing any buggy callers. There is also a limit to how much code one can
write in hopes of avoiding bugs in...code that one writes. :) Which is
why static analysis, unit and regression tests, code reviews are
important too.

Here, I submit that that we're about to cross the line and go too far.
But if you have any examples of buggy callers for
unpin_user_pages_dirty_lock(), that might shift the line.

Or maybe others feel that we haven't gone far enough yet after all?

John Hubbard

 \ /
  Last update: 2020-09-20 06:13    [W:0.120 / U:0.376 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site