[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45db388c-781b-b6e7-ca9a-fc4526f8fad6@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 14:43:46 +0200
From: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
To: Gong Ruiqi <gongruiqi1@...wei.com>
CC: <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>,
<kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
Wang Weiyang <wangweiyang2@...wei.com>,
"Xiu Jianfeng" <xiujianfeng@...wei.com>,
Pedro Falcato <pedro.falcato@...il.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
"David Rientjes" <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2] Randomized slab caches for kmalloc()
From: Gong Ruiqi <gongruiqi1@...wei.com>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 14:26:31 +0800
>
> On 2023/05/11 22:54, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
[...]
> I tried this way of implementation but it didn't work: it did not
> propagate from 16 to 1, but stopped in the middle. I think it's because
> the macro is somehow (indirectly) self-referential and the preprocessor
> won't expand it. Check this for more info:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/Self-Referential-Macros.html
Ooops, I missed that, sorry. Thanks for the link!
>
>> Also I'd rather not put commas ',' at the end of each macro, they're
>> usually put outside where the macro is used.
>
> It seems here we have to put commas at the end. Not only it's to align
> with how KMALLOC_{RCL,CGROUP,DMA}_NAME are implemented, but also
> otherwise the expansion of INIT_KMALLOC_INFO would in some cases be like:
>
> {
> .name[KMALLOC_NORMAL] = "kmalloc-" #__short_size,
> , // an empty entry with a comma
> }
>
> which would cause compilation error in kmalloc_info[]'s initialization.
+
>
>>> +#endif
>>> +#else // CONFIG_RANDOM_KMALLOC_CACHES
>>> +#define KMALLOC_RANDOM_NAME(N, sz)
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> #define INIT_KMALLOC_INFO(__size, __short_size) \
>>> { \
>>> .name[KMALLOC_NORMAL] = "kmalloc-" #__short_size, \
>>> KMALLOC_RCL_NAME(__short_size) \
>>> KMALLOC_CGROUP_NAME(__short_size) \
>>> KMALLOC_DMA_NAME(__short_size) \
>>> + KMALLOC_RANDOM_NAME(CONFIG_RANDOM_KMALLOC_CACHES_NR, __short_size) \
>>
>> Can't those names be __initconst and here you'd just do one loop from 1
>> to KMALLOC_CACHES_NR, which would assign names? I'm not sure compilers
>> will expand that one to a compile-time constant and assigning 69
>> different string pointers per one kmalloc size is a bit of a waste to me.
>
> I'm not sure if I understand the question correctly, but I believe these
> names have been __initconst since kmalloc_info[] is already marked with
> it. Please let me know if it doesn't answer your question.
Ah okay, it's just me trying to show off without looking at the code. I
thought INIT_KMALLOC_INFO() is used somewhere in a function (from its
name), but it's used to initialize const array, okay.
>
>>> .size = __size, \
>>> }
[...]
Thanks,
Olek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists