LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
To: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Cc: mtk.manpages@gmail.com, linux-man <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmap.2: MAP_FIXED is okay if the address range has been reserved
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 08:43:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9c714917-fc29-4d12-b5e8-cff28761a2c1@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cfbbbe06-5e63-e43c-fb28-c5afef9e1e1d@nvidia.com>
On 04/12/2018 09:24 PM, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 04/12/2018 12:18 PM, Jann Horn wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 8:59 PM, John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>> On 04/12/2018 11:49 AM, Jann Horn wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 8:37 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
>>>> <mtk.manpages@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi John,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12 April 2018 at 20:33, John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 04/12/2018 08:39 AM, Jann Horn wrote:
>>>>>>> Clarify that MAP_FIXED is appropriate if the specified address range has
>>>>>>> been reserved using an existing mapping, but shouldn't be used otherwise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> man2/mmap.2 | 19 +++++++++++--------
>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/man2/mmap.2 b/man2/mmap.2
>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> .IP
>>>>>>> For example, suppose that thread A looks through
>>>>>>> @@ -284,13 +285,15 @@ and the PAM libraries
>>>>>>> .UR http://www.linux-pam.org
>>>>>>> .UE .
>>>>>>> .IP
>>>>>>> -Newer kernels
>>>>>>> -(Linux 4.17 and later) have a
>>>>>>> +For cases in which the specified memory region has not been reserved using an
>>>>>>> +existing mapping, newer kernels (Linux 4.17 and later) provide an option
>>>>>>> .B MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE
>>>>>>> -option that avoids the corruption problem; if available,
>>>>>>> -.B MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE
>>>>>>> -should be preferred over
>>>>>>> -.BR MAP_FIXED .
>>>>>>> +that should be used instead; older kernels require the caller to use
>>>>>>> +.I addr
>>>>>>> +as a hint (without
>>>>>>> +.BR MAP_FIXED )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here, I got lost: the sentence suddenly jumps into explaining non-MAP_FIXED
>>>>>> behavior, in the MAP_FIXED section. Maybe if you break up the sentence, and
>>>>>> possibly omit non-MAP_FIXED discussion, it will help.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmmm -- true. That piece could be a little clearer.
>>>>
>>>> How about something like this?
>>>>
>>>> For cases in which MAP_FIXED can not be used because
>>>> the specified memory
>>>> region has not been reserved using an existing mapping,
>>>> newer kernels
>>>> (Linux 4.17 and later) provide an option
>>>> MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE that
>>>> should be used instead. Older kernels require the
>>>> caller to use addr as a hint and take appropriate action if
>>>> the kernel places the new mapping at a different address.
>>>>
>>>> John, Michael, what do you think?
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm still having difficulty with it, because this is in the MAP_FIXED section,
>>> but I think you're documenting the behavior that you get if you do *not*
>>> specify MAP_FIXED, right? Also, the hint behavior is true of both older and
>>> new kernels...
>>
>> The manpage patch you and mhocko wrote mentioned MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE
>> in the MAP_FIXED section - I was trying to avoid undoing a change you
>> had just explicitly made.
>
> heh. So I've succeeding in getting my own wording removed, then? Progress! :)
>
>>
>>> So, if that's your intent (you want to sort of document by contrast to what
>>> would happen if this option were not used), then how about something like this:
>>>
>>>
>>> Without the MAP_FIXED option, the kernel would treat addr as a hint, rather
>>> than a requirement, and the caller would need to take appropriate action
>>> if the kernel placed the mapping at a different address. (For example,
>>> munmap and try again.)
>>
>> I'd be fine with removing the paragraph. As you rightly pointed out,
>> it doesn't really describe MAP_FIXED.
>>
>
> OK, that's probably the simplest fix.
So, you mean remove this entire paragraph:
For cases in which the specified memory region has not been
reserved using an existing mapping, newer kernels (Linux
4.17 and later) provide an option MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE that
should be used instead; older kernels require the caller to
use addr as a hint (without MAP_FIXED) and take appropriate
action if the kernel places the new mapping at a different
address.
It seems like some version of the first half of the paragraph is worth
keeping, though, so as to point the reader in the direction of a remedy.
How about replacing that text with the following:
Since Linux 4.17, the MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE flag can be used
in a multithreaded program to avoid the hazard described
above.
?
Thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-13 6:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-12 15:39 Jann Horn
2018-04-12 18:32 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2018-04-12 18:33 ` John Hubbard
2018-04-12 18:37 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2018-04-12 18:49 ` Jann Horn
2018-04-12 18:59 ` John Hubbard
2018-04-12 19:18 ` Jann Horn
2018-04-12 19:24 ` John Hubbard
2018-04-13 6:43 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) [this message]
2018-04-13 6:49 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-13 15:04 ` Jann Horn
2018-04-13 16:04 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-13 16:05 ` Jann Horn
2018-04-13 16:17 ` Jann Horn
2018-04-16 10:07 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-16 13:55 ` Jann Horn
2018-04-16 19:18 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-16 19:30 ` Jann Horn
2018-04-16 19:57 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-16 20:17 ` Jann Horn
2018-04-16 21:11 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-16 21:12 ` Jann Horn
2018-04-17 6:23 ` Michal Hocko
2018-05-02 13:06 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
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=9c714917-fc29-4d12-b5e8-cff28761a2c1@gmail.com \
--to=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--subject='Re: [PATCH] mmap.2: MAP_FIXED is okay if the address range has been reserved' \
/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
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).