[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202407091155.1D0D7584@keescook>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 11:57:19 -0700
From: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
To: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>,
"Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>,
Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>,
Tony Ambardar <tony.ambardar@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] slab: Allow for type introspection during
allocation
On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 04:57:38PM +0000, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 12:18:34PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is an RFC for some changes I'd like to make to the kernel's
> > allocators (starting with slab) that allow for type introspection, which
> > has been a long-time gap in potential analysis capabilities available
> > at compile-time. The changes here are just a "first step" example that
> > updates kmalloc() and kzalloc() to show what I'm thinking we can do,
> > and shows an example conversion within the fs/pstore tree.
> >
> > Repeating patch 3's commit log here:
> >
> > There is currently no way for the slab to know what type is being
> > allocated, and this hampers the development of any logic that would need
> > this information including basic type checking, alignment need analysis,
> > etc.
> >
> > Allow the size argument to optionally be a variable, from which the
> > type (and there by the size, alignment, or any other features) can be
> > determined at compile-time. This allows for the incremental replacement
> > of the classic code pattern:
> >
> > obj = kmalloc(sizeof(*obj), gfp);
> >
> > into:
> >
> > obj = kmalloc(obj, gfp);
> >
> > As an additional build-time safety feature, the return value of kmalloc()
> > also becomes typed so that the assignment and first argument cannot drift,
> > doing away with the other, more fragile, classic code pattern:
> >
> > obj = kmalloc(sizeof(struct the_object), gfp);
> >
> > into:
> >
> > obj = kmalloc(obj, gfp);
>
> I like the idea, however it's not as simple and straightforward because
> it's common for structures to have a variable part (usually at the end)
> and also allocate more than one structure at once.
>
> There are many allocations which look like
> kmalloc(sizeof(my_struct) * 2 + SOME_MAGIC_LENGTH, GFP_...)
> or something like this, which you can't easily convert to your scheme.
Right -- and with this we can leave those as-is initially (since a size
argument will still work).
> The only option I see is to introduce the new set of functions/macros,
> something like kmalloc_obj() or kmalloc_struct(). Or maybe tmalloc()?
> (t for typed)
Yeah, in a neighboring thread I was talking about a kmalloc_obj that
would handle fixed-sized structs, flexible array structs, and arrays. I
need to prove out the array part, but the first two should be trivial to
implement.
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists