2.6.34.5 stable review

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.34.5 release, a "fix the .34.6 release" to resolve problems found in that kernel version.

There are 3 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let us know. If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and wants to add a Signed-off-by: line to the patch, please respond with it.

Responses should be made by Friday, August 20, 2010 10:00:00 UTC. Anything received after that time might be too late.

The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:

	kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/stable-review/patch-2.6.34.5-rc1.gz

and the diffstat can be found below.

thanks,

greg k-h

 Makefile                     |    2 +-
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c |    1 +
 fs/proc/task_mmu.c           |    8 +++++++-
 mm/memory.c                  |   13 ++++++-------
 mm/mlock.c                   |    8 ++++++++
 5 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

2.6.34-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

commit 11ac552477e32835cb6970bf0a70c210807f5673 upstream.

We do in fact need to unmap the page table _before_ doing the whole stack guard page logic, because if it is needed (mainly 32-bit x86 with PAE and CONFIG_HIGHPTE, but other architectures may use it too) then it will do a kmap_atomic/kunmap_atomic.

And those kmaps will create an atomic region that we cannot do allocations in. However, the whole stack expand code will need to do anon_vma_prepare() and vma_lock_anon_vma() and they cannot do that in an atomic region.

Now, a better model might actually be to do the anon_vma_prepare() when _creating_ a VM_GROWSDOWN segment, and not have to worry about any of this at page fault time. But in the meantime, this is the straightforward fix for the issue.

See https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16588 for details.

---
 mm/memory.c |   13 ++++++-------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

@@ -2783,24 +2783,23 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct mm_s
 	spinlock_t *ptl;
 	pte_t entry;
 
-	if (check_stack_guard_page(vma, address) < 0) {
-		pte_unmap(page_table);
+	pte_unmap(page_table);
+
+	/* Check if we need to add a guard page to the stack */
+	if (check_stack_guard_page(vma, address) < 0)
 		return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
-	}
 
+	/* Use the zero-page for reads */
 	if (!(flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE)) {
 		entry = pte_mkspecial(pfn_pte(my_zero_pfn(address),
 						vma->vm_page_prot));
-		ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, pmd);
-		spin_lock(ptl);
+		page_table = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, &ptl);
 		if (!pte_none(*page_table))
 			goto unlock;
 		goto setpte;
 	}
 
 	/* Allocate our own private page. */
-	pte_unmap(page_table);
-
 	if (unlikely(anon_vma_prepare(vma)))
 		goto oom;
 	page = alloc_zeroed_user_highpage_movable(vma, address);

2.6.34-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

commit d7824370e26325c881b665350ce64fb0a4fde24a upstream.

This commit makes the stack guard page somewhat less visible to user space. It does this by:

- not showing the guard page in /proc/<pid>/maps

It looks like lvm-tools will actually read /proc/self/maps to figure out where all its mappings are, and effectively do a specialized "mlockall()" in user space. By not showing the guard page as part of the mapping (by just adding PAGE_SIZE to the start for grows-up pages), lvm-tools ends up not being aware of it.

- by also teaching the _real_ mlock() functionality not to try to lock the guard page.

That would just expand the mapping down to create a new guard page, so there really is no point in trying to lock it in place.

It would perhaps be nice to show the guard page specially in /proc/<pid>/maps (or at least mark grow-down segments some way), but let's not open ourselves up to more breakage by user space from programs that depends on the exact deails of the 'maps' file.

Special thanks to Henrique de Moraes Holschuh for diving into lvm-tools source code to see what was going on with the whole new warning.

---
 fs/proc/task_mmu.c |    8 +++++++-
 mm/mlock.c         |    8 ++++++++
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

@@ -210,6 +210,7 @@ static void show_map_vma(struct seq_file
 	int flags = vma->vm_flags;
 	unsigned long ino = 0;
 	unsigned long long pgoff = 0;
+	unsigned long start;
 	dev_t dev = 0;
 	int len;
 

@@ -220,8 +221,13 @@ static void show_map_vma(struct seq_file
 		pgoff = ((loff_t)vma->vm_pgoff) << PAGE_SHIFT;
 	}
 
+	/* We don't show the stack guard page in /proc/maps */
+	start = vma->vm_start;
+	if (vma->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN)
+		start += PAGE_SIZE;
+
 	seq_printf(m, "%08lx-%08lx %c%c%c%c %08llx %02x:%02x %lu %n",
-			vma->vm_start,
+			start,
 			vma->vm_end,
 			flags & VM_READ ? 'r' : '-',
 			flags & VM_WRITE ? 'w' : '-',

@@ -167,6 +167,14 @@ static long __mlock_vma_pages_range(stru
 	if (vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE)
 		gup_flags |= FOLL_WRITE;
 
+	/* We don't try to access the guard page of a stack vma */
+	if (vma->vm_flags & VM_GROWSDOWN) {
+		if (start == vma->vm_start) {
+			start += PAGE_SIZE;
+			nr_pages--;
+		}
+	}
+
 	while (nr_pages > 0) {
 		int i;
 

2.6.34-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>

This fixes a build error reported in vmware.c due to commit 9f242dc10e0c3c1eb32d8c83c18650a35fd7f80d

---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c |    1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
 
 #include <linux/dmi.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/jiffies.h>
 #include <asm/div64.h>
 #include <asm/vmware.h>
 #include <asm/x86_init.h>