[PATCH v2 2/2] arm64/mm: fix incorrect file_map_count for invalid pmd/pud

Liu Shixin liushixin2 at huawei.com
Mon Nov 21 17:24:57 PST 2022



On 2022/11/22 2:16, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:15:49AM +0800, Liu Shixin wrote:
>> On 2022/11/18 22:34, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 03:56:02PM +0800, Liu Shixin wrote:
>>>>  static inline bool pud_user_accessible_page(pud_t pud)
>>>>  {
>>>> -	return pud_leaf(pud) && pud_user(pud);
>>>> +	return pud_valid(pud) && pud_leaf(pud) && pud_user(pud);
>>> Not caused by this patch, but why don't we have something like a
>>> pud_user_exec() check here like we do for the pte and pmd levels?
>> As far as I know, there is no user use the user executable pud on arm64, so didn't define pud_user_exec().
> I can believe they don't get exposed to userspace at all, but exposing only
> as non-executable doesn't sound right. So I would have thought that either
> pud_user_accessible_page() would always return false or it would need to
> check for the executable case too.
Thanks for your advice, I will add the check for the executable case too.

>
> Will
> .
>




More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list