Skip to contentSkip to conversation

mm-update-memfd-seal-write-check-to-include-f_seal_write.patch removed from -mm tree

merged mm-stable Andrew Morton 1 participant 1 message Oct 18, 2023

lore
Share & tools
lore

Andrew Morton

author tree notice Applied
#0 lore raw

The quilt patch titled
Subject: mm: update memfd seal write check to include F_SEAL_WRITE
has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was
mm-update-memfd-seal-write-check-to-include-f_seal_write.patch

This patch was dropped because it was merged into the mm-stable branch of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm

------------------------------------------------------
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <[email protected]>
Subject: mm: update memfd seal write check to include F_SEAL_WRITE
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2023 18:04:29 +0100

The seal_check_future_write() function is called by shmem_mmap() or hugetlbfs_file_mmap() to disallow any future writable mappings of an memfd sealed this way.

The F_SEAL_WRITE flag is not checked here, as that is handled via the mapping->i_mmap_writable mechanism and so any attempt at a mapping would fail before this could be run.

However we intend to change this, meaning this check can be performed for F_SEAL_WRITE mappings also.

The logic here is equally applicable to both flags, so update this function to accommodate both and rename it accordingly.

---

 fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c |    2 +-
 include/linux/mm.h   |   15 ++++++++-------
 mm/shmem.c           |    2 +-
 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c renamed from fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c~mm-update-memfd-seal-write-check-to-include-f_seal_write +1 -1
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ static int hugetlbfs_file_mmap(struct fi
 	vm_flags_set(vma, VM_HUGETLB | VM_DONTEXPAND);
 	vma->vm_ops = &hugetlb_vm_ops;
 
-	ret = seal_check_future_write(info->seals, vma);
+	ret = seal_check_write(info->seals, vma);
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
 
include/linux/mm.h renamed from include/linux/mm.h~mm-update-memfd-seal-write-check-to-include-f_seal_write +8 -7
@@ -4076,25 +4076,26 @@ static inline void mem_dump_obj(void *ob
 #endif
 
 /**
- * seal_check_future_write - Check for F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE flag and handle it
+ * seal_check_write - Check for F_SEAL_WRITE or F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE flags and
+ *                    handle them.
  * @seals: the seals to check
  * @vma: the vma to operate on
  *
- * Check whether F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE is set; if so, do proper check/handling on
- * the vma flags.  Return 0 if check pass, or <0 for errors.
+ * Check whether F_SEAL_WRITE or F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE are set; if so, do proper
+ * check/handling on the vma flags.  Return 0 if check pass, or <0 for errors.
  */
-static inline int seal_check_future_write(int seals, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
+static inline int seal_check_write(int seals, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
 {
-	if (seals & F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE) {
+	if (seals & (F_SEAL_WRITE | F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE)) {
 		/*
 		 * New PROT_WRITE and MAP_SHARED mmaps are not allowed when
-		 * "future write" seal active.
+		 * write seals are active.
 		 */
 		if ((vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED) && (vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE))
 			return -EPERM;
 
 		/*
-		 * Since an F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE sealed memfd can be mapped as
+		 * Since an F_SEAL_[FUTURE_]WRITE sealed memfd can be mapped as
 		 * MAP_SHARED and read-only, take care to not allow mprotect to
 		 * revert protections on such mappings. Do this only for shared
 		 * mappings. For private mappings, don't need to mask
mm/shmem.c renamed from mm/shmem.c~mm-update-memfd-seal-write-check-to-include-f_seal_write +1 -1
@@ -2378,7 +2378,7 @@ static int shmem_mmap(struct file *file,
 	struct shmem_inode_info *info = SHMEM_I(inode);
 	int ret;
 
-	ret = seal_check_future_write(info->seals, vma);
+	ret = seal_check_write(info->seals, vma);
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
 

_

Patches currently in -mm which might be from [email protected] are