OpenVZ / Virtuozzo kernel development (devel@openvz.org)
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: no-reply@sashiko.virtuozzo.com
To: Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@virtuozzo.com>,
	Vasileios Almpanis <vasileios.almpanis@virtuozzo.com>,
	Andrey Drobyshev <andrey.drobyshev@virtuozzo.com>,
	Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: devel@openvz.org
Subject: Re: [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 7/8] exec: protect preserved memory against surviving shared-mm tasks
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2026 17:24:37 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <010701a13b71d002-8786f746-5d27-43bf-bc0b-e4c019bd0aa4-000000@eu-central-1.amazonses.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261014-b4-prep-khorenko-vstor-149847-2-doexec-pinned-memory-v1-7-36f1120f9b57@virtuozzo.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] fork: copy_mm()/copy_process() take page_table_lock twice per shared-mm clone
- [Low] exec: VM_EXEC_KEEP scan in reserve_preserved_mem() is stale by exec_mmap()
--

commit 3fae5b8a82902f91e53a5e8e729322cb7b034228
Author: Andrey Drobyshev <andrey.drobyshev@virtuozzo.com>

exec: protect preserved memory against surviving shared-mm tasks

This patch makes an exec that accepts preserved memory fail with EBUSY
when a task outside the thread group still uses the mm and the mm has a
VM_EXEC_KEEP VMA. copy_mm() refuses and counts CLONE_VM, non-thread clones
while the mm is marked. exec_mmap() takes the preserve path only when the
mm was marked.

Link: https://virtuozzo.atlassian.net/browse/VSTOR-150231

> diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
> --- a/fs/exec.c
> +++ b/fs/exec.c

[ ... ]

> +static int reserve_preserved_mem(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
> +{
> +	struct mm_struct *mm = current->mm;

[ ... ]

> +	mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> +	if (!preserve)
> +		return 0;

[Severity: Low]
Can the result of this scan be stale by the time exec_mmap() runs?

When no VM_EXEC_KEEP VMA is found here, nothing is reserved:
exec_keep_active and bprm->preserving_mem both stay unset.  Sibling
threads have not yet been removed by de_thread(), and copy_mm() only
refuses clones while exec_keep_active is set.  So a sibling thread or a
CLONE_VM task can still call madvise(MADV_DOEXEC) after mmap_read_unlock()
and set VM_EXEC_KEEP on a range.

> @@ -1040,7 +1112,7 @@ static int exec_mmap(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
>  			up_write(&tsk->signal->exec_update_lock);
>  			return ret;
>  		}
> -		if (unlikely(bprm->accepts_preserved_mem)) {
> +		if (unlikely(bprm->preserving_mem)) {

Here the preserve path (write lock plus vma_dup_some()) is now selected by
the early sample rather than by the VMAs present under the lock at copy
time.  A VM_EXEC_KEEP VMA created after the scan in
reserve_preserved_mem() would not be copied, and the range would be lost
with the old mm without any error.

Before this patch, accepts_preserved_mem alone selected the path, and
vma_dup_some() copied any VM_EXEC_KEEP VMA present under
mmap_write_lock.  Should the decision be revalidated, or the mark taken
before the scan, so that a range marked during begin_new_exec() is not
silently dropped?

[ ... ]

> diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
> --- a/kernel/fork.c
> +++ b/kernel/fork.c

[ ... ]

> +/* Keep unpublished CLONE_VM tasks visible to preserving-exec admission. */
> +static int exec_keep_clone_begin(struct mm_struct *mm)
> +{
> +	int ret = 0;
> +
> +	spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
> +	if (mm->exec_keep_active)
> +		ret = -EBUSY;
> +	else
> +		mm->exec_keep_clones++;
> +	spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock);
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static void exec_keep_clone_end(struct mm_struct *mm)
> +{
> +	spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
> +	if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(!mm->exec_keep_clones))
> +		mm->exec_keep_clones--;
> +	spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock);
> +}

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a correctness problem, but is the cost of this accounting
intended for every spawn?

exec_keep_clone_begin() in copy_mm() and exec_keep_clone_end() in
copy_process() each take and release the parent's mm->page_table_lock.
This happens on every CLONE_VM clone that is not a thread (vfork(),
posix_spawn(), clone(CLONE_VM)), whether or not the mm has any
VM_EXEC_KEEP VMA and whether or not an exec is in progress.

page_table_lock also protects page table operations, so a multithreaded
parent taking page faults can contend with it.

Would an atomic counter, or skipping the accounting until the mm has ever
had MADV_DOEXEC applied, avoid the two lock round trips per spawn?

[ ... ]

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.vzint.dev/#/patchset/20261014-b4-prep-khorenko-vstor-149847-2-doexec-pinned-memory-v1-0-36f1120f9b57@virtuozzo.com?part=7

_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-14 17:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-14 17:11 [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 0/8] mm: keep DMA-pinned MADV_DOEXEC memory working across exec Konstantin Khorenko
2026-10-14 17:11 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 1/8] oracle/mm: fix VM_BUG_ON hit when preserving memory Konstantin Khorenko
2026-10-14 17:16   ` no-reply
2026-10-14 17:11 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 2/8] oracle/mm: hold the source mmap write lock when copying PTEs Konstantin Khorenko
2026-10-14 17:15   ` no-reply
2026-10-14 17:11 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 3/8] oracle/mm: do not write protect COW mappings when preserving across exec Konstantin Khorenko
2026-10-14 17:20   ` no-reply
2026-10-14 17:11 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 4/8] oracle/mm: write protect preserved PTEs but keep them exclusive Konstantin Khorenko
2026-10-14 17:18   ` no-reply
2026-10-14 17:11 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 5/8] oracle/mm: set MMF_HAS_PINNED on the mm receiving preserved pages Konstantin Khorenko
2026-10-14 17:19   ` no-reply
2026-10-14 17:11 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 6/8] oracle/mm: zap the preserved ranges of the old mm after copying them Konstantin Khorenko
2026-10-14 17:24   ` no-reply
2026-10-14 17:11 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 7/8] exec: protect preserved memory against surviving shared-mm tasks Konstantin Khorenko
2026-10-14 17:24   ` no-reply [this message]
2026-10-14 17:11 ` [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 8/8] selftests/mm: test memory preservation across exec Konstantin Khorenko
2026-10-14 17:33   ` no-reply

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=010701a13b71d002-8786f746-5d27-43bf-bc0b-e4c019bd0aa4-000000@eu-central-1.amazonses.com \
    --to=no-reply@sashiko.virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=andrey.drobyshev@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=devel@openvz.org \
    --cc=khorenko@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=ptikhomirov@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=vasileios.almpanis@virtuozzo.com \
    /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