[RFC PATCH] vfs: Fix might sleep in load_unaligned_zeropad() with rcu read lock held
Xie Yuanbin
xieyuanbin1 at huawei.com
Thu Nov 27 17:39:35 PST 2025
On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 19:26:40 +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> For quick and dirty variant (on current tree), how about
> adding
> if (unlikely(addr > TASK_SIZE) && !user_mode(regs))
> goto no_context;
>
> right after
>
> if (!ttbr0_usermode_access_allowed(regs))
> goto no_context;
>
> in do_page_fault() there?
>
> NOTE: that might or might not break vdso; I don't think it would, but...
On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 23:31:00 +0000, Russell King wrote:
> Now, for 32-bit ARM, I think I am coming to the conclusion that Al's
> suggestion is probably the easiest solution. However, whether it has
> side effects, I couldn't say - the 32-bit ARM fault code has been
> modified by quite a few people in ways I don't yet understand, so I
> can't be certain at the moment whether it would cause problems.
>
> I think the only thing to do is to try the solution and see what
> breaks. I'm not in a position to be able to do that as, having not
> had reason to touch 32-bit ARM for years, I don't have a hackable
> platform nearby. Maybe Xie Yuanbin can test it?
Hi, Al Viro and Russell King!
I moved the judgment forward to before local_irq_enable() and submitted
a new patch:
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/20251127140109.191657-1-xieyuanbin1@huawei.com
This is because there's another bug I reported before that also requires
a similar judgment, but before the interrupt is enabled.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/20250925025744.6807-1-xieyuanbin1@huawei.com
I hope this can fix both of these bugs.
It is closer to the x86's implementation and works well in current tests.
Could you please take a look? Thanks you very much!
Xie Yuanbin
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list