[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] invalidate_mmap_range() misses remap_file_pages()-affected targets
William Lee Irwin III <> wrote:
> invalidate_mmap_range(), and hence vmtruncate(), can miss its targets
> due to remap_file_pages() disturbing the former invariant of file
> offsets only being mapped within vmas tagged as mapping file offset
> ranges containing them.

I was going to just not bother about this wart. After all, we get to write
the standard on remap_file_pages(), and we can say "the
truncate-causes-SIGBUS thing doesn't work". After all, it is not very

But I wonder if this effect could be used maliciously. Say, user A has
read-only access to user B's file, and uses that access to set up a
nonlinear mapping thereby causing user B's truncate to not behave
correctly. But this example is OK, isn't it? User A will just receive an
anonymous page for his troubles.

Can you think of any stability or security scenario which says that we
_should_ implement the conventional truncate behaviour?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [W:0.055 / U:1.432 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site