Android uses ashmem for sharing memory regions. We are looking forward
to migrating all usecases of ashmem to memfd so that we can possibly
remove the ashmem driver in the future from staging while also
benefiting from using memfd and contributing to it. Note staging drivers
are also not ABI and generally can be removed at anytime.
One of the main usecases Android has is the ability to create a region
and mmap it as writeable, then add protection against making any
"future" writes while keeping the existing already mmap'ed
writeable-region active. This allows us to implement a usecase where
receivers of the shared memory buffer can get a read-only view, while
the sender continues to write to the buffer.
See CursorWindow documentation in Android for more details:
https://developer.android.com/reference/android/database/CursorWindow
This usecase cannot be implemented with the existing F_SEAL_WRITE seal.
To support the usecase, this patch adds a new F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE seal
which prevents any future mmap and write syscalls from succeeding while
keeping the existing mmap active. The following program shows the seal
working in action:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
#include <linux/memfd.h>
#include <linux/fcntl.h>
#include <asm/unistd.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#define F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE 0x0010
#define REGION_SIZE (5 * 1024 * 1024)
int memfd_create_region(const char *name, size_t size)
{
int ret;
int fd = syscall(__NR_memfd_create, name, MFD_ALLOW_SEALING);
if (fd < 0) return fd;
ret = ftruncate(fd, size);
if (ret < 0) { close(fd); return ret; }
return fd;
}
int main() {
int ret, fd;
void *addr, *addr2, *addr3, *addr1;
ret = memfd_create_region("test_region", REGION_SIZE);
printf("ret=%d\n", ret);
fd = ret;
// Create map
addr = mmap(0, REGION_SIZE, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);
if (addr == MAP_FAILED)
printf("map 0 failed\n");
else
printf("map 0 passed\n");
if ((ret = write(fd, "test", 4)) != 4)
printf("write failed even though no future-write seal "
"(ret=%d errno =%d)\n", ret, errno);
else
printf("write passed\n");
addr1 = mmap(0, REGION_SIZE, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);
if (addr1 == MAP_FAILED)
perror("map 1 prot-write failed even though no seal\n");
else
printf("map 1 prot-write passed as expected\n");
ret = fcntl(fd, F_ADD_SEALS, F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE |
F_SEAL_GROW |
F_SEAL_SHRINK);
if (ret == -1)
printf("fcntl failed, errno: %d\n", errno);
else
printf("future-write seal now active\n");
if ((ret = write(fd, "test", 4)) != 4)
printf("write failed as expected due to future-write seal\n");
else
printf("write passed (unexpected)\n");
addr2 = mmap(0, REGION_SIZE, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);
if (addr2 == MAP_FAILED)
perror("map 2 prot-write failed as expected due to seal\n");
else
printf("map 2 passed\n");
addr3 = mmap(0, REGION_SIZE, PROT_READ, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);
if (addr3 == MAP_FAILED)
perror("map 3 failed\n");
else
printf("map 3 prot-read passed as expected\n");
}
The output of running this program is as follows:
ret=3
map 0 passed
write passed
map 1 prot-write passed as expected
future-write seal now active
write failed as expected due to future-write seal
map 2 prot-write failed as expected due to seal
: Permission denied
map 3 prot-read passed as expected
Cc: jreck@google.com
Cc: john.stultz@linaro.org
Cc: tkjos@google.com
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: hch@infradead.org
Reviewed-by: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Reported-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Change-id: Ie702c08f1f41ce78e5e8db3f415446ceedb01795
Bug: 113362644
Verified with test program at: https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1008117/
Backport link: https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1014892/
Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
1dc8ca4429