On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 11:57:02AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 08:37:59AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 11:46:18PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 10:03:11AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > On October 23, 2021 8:27:28 AM PDT, Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >and my first reaction was to send a revert the untested commit 110860541f44
> > > > >("mm/secretmem: use refcount_t instead of atomic_t").
> > >
> > > I think you should. This isn't a real problem.
> >
> > Do you mean that creation of 4 billion of file descriptors is not feasible?
>
> On a sufficiently large machine, it is. But then we have the same
> problem with other atomic_t. If you really care, just check whether
> secretmem_users has gone negative, and return -ENFILE. It doesn't
> even have to be all that exact; you've got 2 billion values of slop
> to use before you hit the wrap from negative to 0 which is the actual
> problem.
>
> ie this:
>
> +++ b/mm/secretmem.c
> @@ -203,6 +203,8 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(memfd_secret, unsigned int, flags)
>
> if (flags & ~(SECRETMEM_FLAGS_MASK | O_CLOEXEC))
> return -EINVAL;
> + if (atomic_read(&secretmem_users) < 0)
> + return -ENFILE;
So you suggest to prevent creation of the file descriptor to ensure there
is no overflow of secretmem_users. I don't feel it's a clean and elegant
solution.
>
> fd = get_unused_fd_flags(flags & O_CLOEXEC);
> if (fd < 0)
>
>
> Also, why does secretmem depend on !EMBEDDED?
There was a request from tiny-config maintainers to keep this code outside
tiny-config and the best option I could find to make secretmem depend on
!EMBEDDED.
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
