Recent kernels seem to generate this: "memfd_create() without MFD_EXEC nor MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL, pid=3976 'Xorg'" Is this a kernel problem or something to do with Xorg ? Seen in Kernels 6.3.4 and 6.4.0-rc4. Thanks
(In reply to Stuart Foster from comment #0) > Recent kernels seem to generate this: > > "memfd_create() without MFD_EXEC nor MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL, pid=3976 'Xorg'" > > Is this a kernel problem or something to do with Xorg ? > > Seen in Kernels 6.3.4 and 6.4.0-rc4. > > Thanks What is your dmesg? Xorg logs? Can you describe your hardware setup?
Hardware is: AMD FX-8370 Eight-Core Processor with Oland PRO [Radeon R7 240/340 / Radeon 520] The os is a recent LFS/BLFS system. Logs to follow.
Created attachment 304356 [details] Xorg Log file
Created attachment 304357 [details] dmesg from kernel 6.3.4
(In reply to Stuart Foster from comment #0) > Recent kernels seem to generate this: > > "memfd_create() without MFD_EXEC nor MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL, pid=3976 'Xorg'" > > Is this a kernel problem or something to do with Xorg ? > > Seen in Kernels 6.3.4 and 6.4.0-rc4. Is this issue also occur on older kernels?
Does not occur on 6.2.15 which is the kernel I used prior to moving to 6.3.4
Back tracking 6.2.16 is Ok, 6.3.0 has the problem. I will bisect and see if I can find the root cause.
Created attachment 304359 [details] Bisect log Result of the bisect: Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps) [32d118ad50a5afecb74358bcefc5cb6ea6ccfc2b] selftests/memfd: add tests for F_SEAL_EXEC 105ff5339f498af74e60d7662c8f1c4d21f1342d is the first bad commit commit 105ff5339f498af74e60d7662c8f1c4d21f1342d Author: Jeff Xu <jeffxu@google.com>
Comments received in e-mails: Vlastimil Babka wrote: Hm indeed it seems to have introduced 2 new flags and immediately warn if any process doesn't use them. Maybe it would make sense for some of the non-default values of vm.memfd_noexec, but it's too early to warn unconditionally everywhere, no? Kees reply: This is pretty standard for getting new options like this noticed by userspace -- there is no regression in _behavior_. It's just a reminder to fix userspace code.
(In reply to Stuart Foster from comment #9) > Comments received in e-mails: > > Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > Hm indeed it seems to have introduced 2 new flags and immediately warn if > any process doesn't use them. Maybe it would make sense for some of the > non-default values of vm.memfd_noexec, but it's too early to warn > unconditionally everywhere, no? > > Kees reply: > > This is pretty standard for getting new options like this noticed by > userspace -- there is no regression in _behavior_. It's just a reminder > to fix userspace code. Can you file bug against Xorg to your distro's bug tracker?
On 02/06/2023 03:13, bugzilla-daemon@kernel.org wrote: > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217508 > > --- Comment #10 from Bagas Sanjaya (bagasdotme@gmail.com) --- > (In reply to Stuart Foster from comment #9) >> Comments received in e-mails: >> >> Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> >> Hm indeed it seems to have introduced 2 new flags and immediately warn if >> any process doesn't use them. Maybe it would make sense for some of the >> non-default values of vm.memfd_noexec, but it's too early to warn >> unconditionally everywhere, no? >> >> Kees reply: >> >> This is pretty standard for getting new options like this noticed by >> userspace -- there is no regression in _behavior_. It's just a reminder >> to fix userspace code. > > Can you file bug against Xorg to your distro's bug tracker? > Yes I have done that all ready.
Raised the issue with Xorg: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1553