Re: [PATCH 01/18] mm: introduce MAP_SHARED_VALIDATE, a mechanism to safely define new mmap flags

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:02 AM, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/01/2017 04:36 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
>> From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> The mmap(2) syscall suffers from the ABI anti-pattern of not validating
>> unknown flags. However, proposals like MAP_SYNC need a mechanism to
>> define new behavior that is known to fail on older kernels without the
>> support. Define a new MAP_SHARED_VALIDATE flag pattern that is
>> guaranteed to fail on all legacy mmap implementations.
>
> So I'm trying to make sense of this together with Michal's attempt for
> MAP_FIXED_SAFE [1] where he has to introduce a completely new flag
> instead of flag modifier exactly for the reason of not validating
> unknown flags. And my conclusion is that because MAP_SHARED_VALIDATE
> implies MAP_SHARED and excludes MAP_PRIVATE, MAP_FIXED_SAFE as a
> modifier cannot build on top of this. Wouldn't thus it be really better
> long-term to introduce mmap3 at this point? ...

We have room to define MAP_PRIVATE_VALIDATE in MAP_TYPE on every arch
except parisc. Can we steal an extra bit for MAP_TYPE from somewhere
else on parisc?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux