On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 6:30 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021, at 9:13 AM, Jann Horn wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 7:59 AM Andrei Vagin <avagin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > This change introduces the new system call:
> > > process_vm_exec(pid_t pid, struct sigcontext *uctx, unsigned long flags,
> > > siginfo_t * uinfo, sigset_t *sigmask, size_t sizemask)
> > >
> > > process_vm_exec allows to execute the current process in an address
> > > space of another process.
> > [...]
> >
> > I still think that this whole API is fundamentally the wrong approach
> > because it tries to shoehorn multiple usecases with different
> > requirements into a single API. But that aside:
> >
> > > +static void swap_mm(struct mm_struct *prev_mm, struct mm_struct *target_mm)
> > > +{
> > > + struct task_struct *tsk = current;
> > > + struct mm_struct *active_mm;
> > > +
> > > + task_lock(tsk);
> > > + /* Hold off tlb flush IPIs while switching mm's */
> > > + local_irq_disable();
> > > +
> > > + sync_mm_rss(prev_mm);
> > > +
> > > + vmacache_flush(tsk);
> > > +
> > > + active_mm = tsk->active_mm;
> > > + if (active_mm != target_mm) {
> > > + mmgrab(target_mm);
> > > + tsk->active_mm = target_mm;
> > > + }
> > > + tsk->mm = target_mm;
> >
> > I'm pretty sure you're not currently allowed to overwrite the ->mm
> > pointer of a userspace thread. For example, zap_threads() assumes that
> > all threads running under a process have the same ->mm. (And if you're
> > fiddling with ->mm stuff, you should probably CC linux-mm@.)
>
> exec_mmap() does it, so it can’t be entirely impossible.
Yeah, true, execve can do it - I guess the thing that makes that
special is that it's running after de_thread(), so it's guaranteed to
be single-threaded?
