| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <50C6DE95.3050603@vflare.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 23:19:49 -0800
From: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
CC: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@...hat.com>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
Sam Hansen <solid.se7en@...il.com>,
Linux Driver Project <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: feel Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] zsmalloc: add function to query object size
On 12/10/2012 07:59 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 04:45:53PM -0800, Nitin Gupta wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 11:20:42PM -0800, Nitin Gupta wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 30, 2012, at 5:54 AM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kernel.2@...il.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:54:48PM -0800, Nitin Gupta wrote:
>>>>>> Changelog v2 vs v1:
>>>>>> - None
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adds zs_get_object_size(handle) which provides the size of
>>>>>> the given object. This is useful since the user (zram etc.)
>>>>>> now do not have to maintain object sizes separately, saving
>>>>>> on some metadata size (4b per page).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The object handle encodes <page, offset> pair which currently points
>>>>>> to the start of the object. Now, the handle implicitly stores the size
>>>>>> information by pointing to the object's end instead. Since zsmalloc is
>>>>>> a slab based allocator, the start of the object can be easily determined
>>>>>> and the difference between the end offset encoded in the handle and the
>>>>>> start gives us the object size.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>
>>>>> Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> I already had a few comment in your previous versoin.
>>>>> I'm OK although you ignore them because I can make follow up patch about
>>>>> my nitpick but could you answer below my question?
>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c | 177 +++++++++++++++++++++---------
>>>>>> drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc.h | 1 +
>>>>>> 2 files changed, 127 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c b/drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c
>>>>>> index 09a9d35..65c9d3b 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c
>>>>>> @@ -112,20 +112,20 @@
>>>>>> #define MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS 36
>>>>>> #else /* !CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G */
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> - * If this definition of MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS is used, OBJ_INDEX_BITS will just
>>>>>> + * If this definition of MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS is used, OFFSET_BITS will just
>>>>>> * be PAGE_SHIFT
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> #define MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS BITS_PER_LONG
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>> #define _PFN_BITS (MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS - PAGE_SHIFT)
>>>>>> -#define OBJ_INDEX_BITS (BITS_PER_LONG - _PFN_BITS)
>>>>>> -#define OBJ_INDEX_MASK ((_AC(1, UL) << OBJ_INDEX_BITS) - 1)
>>>>>> +#define OFFSET_BITS (BITS_PER_LONG - _PFN_BITS)
>>>>>> +#define OFFSET_MASK ((_AC(1, UL) << OFFSET_BITS) - 1)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #define MAX(a, b) ((a) >= (b) ? (a) : (b))
>>>>>> /* ZS_MIN_ALLOC_SIZE must be multiple of ZS_ALIGN */
>>>>>> #define ZS_MIN_ALLOC_SIZE \
>>>>>> - MAX(32, (ZS_MAX_PAGES_PER_ZSPAGE << PAGE_SHIFT >> OBJ_INDEX_BITS))
>>>>>> + MAX(32, (ZS_MAX_PAGES_PER_ZSPAGE << PAGE_SHIFT >> OFFSET_BITS))
>>>>>> #define ZS_MAX_ALLOC_SIZE PAGE_SIZE
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> @@ -256,6 +256,11 @@ static int is_last_page(struct page *page)
>>>>>> return PagePrivate2(page);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +static unsigned long get_page_index(struct page *page)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + return is_first_page(page) ? 0 : page->index;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> static void get_zspage_mapping(struct page *page, unsigned int *class_idx,
>>>>>> enum fullness_group *fullness)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> @@ -433,39 +438,86 @@ static struct page *get_next_page(struct page *page)
>>>>>> return next;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -/* Encode <page, obj_idx> as a single handle value */
>>>>>> -static void *obj_location_to_handle(struct page *page, unsigned long obj_idx)
>>>>>> +static struct page *get_prev_page(struct page *page)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> - unsigned long handle;
>>>>>> + struct page *prev, *first_page;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (!page) {
>>>>>> - BUG_ON(obj_idx);
>>>>>> - return NULL;
>>>>>> - }
>>>>>> + first_page = get_first_page(page);
>>>>>> + if (page == first_page)
>>>>>> + prev = NULL;
>>>>>> + else if (page == (struct page *)first_page->private)
>>>>>> + prev = first_page;
>>>>>> + else
>>>>>> + prev = list_entry(page->lru.prev, struct page, lru);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - handle = page_to_pfn(page) << OBJ_INDEX_BITS;
>>>>>> - handle |= (obj_idx & OBJ_INDEX_MASK);
>>>>>> + return prev;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - return (void *)handle;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -/* Decode <page, obj_idx> pair from the given object handle */
>>>>>> -static void obj_handle_to_location(unsigned long handle, struct page **page,
>>>>>> - unsigned long *obj_idx)
>>>>>> +static void *encode_ptr(struct page *page, unsigned long offset)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> - *page = pfn_to_page(handle >> OBJ_INDEX_BITS);
>>>>>> - *obj_idx = handle & OBJ_INDEX_MASK;
>>>>>> + unsigned long ptr;
>>>>>> + ptr = page_to_pfn(page) << OFFSET_BITS;
>>>>>> + ptr |= offset & OFFSET_MASK;
>>>>>> + return (void *)ptr;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static void decode_ptr(unsigned long ptr, struct page **page,
>>>>>> + unsigned int *offset)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + *page = pfn_to_page(ptr >> OFFSET_BITS);
>>>>>> + *offset = ptr & OFFSET_MASK;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static struct page *obj_handle_to_page(unsigned long handle)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct page *page;
>>>>>> + unsigned int offset;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + decode_ptr(handle, &page, &offset);
>>>>>> + if (offset < get_page_index(page))
>>>>>> + page = get_prev_page(page);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return page;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static unsigned int obj_handle_to_offset(unsigned long handle,
>>>>>> + unsigned int class_size)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct page *page;
>>>>>> + unsigned int offset;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + decode_ptr(handle, &page, &offset);
>>>>>> + if (offset < get_page_index(page))
>>>>>> + offset = PAGE_SIZE - class_size + get_page_index(page);
>>>>>> + else
>>>>>> + offset = roundup(offset, class_size) - class_size;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return offset;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -static unsigned long obj_idx_to_offset(struct page *page,
>>>>>> - unsigned long obj_idx, int class_size)
>>>>>> +/* Encode <page, offset, size> as a single handle value */
>>>>>> +static void *obj_location_to_handle(struct page *page, unsigned int offset,
>>>>>> + unsigned int size, unsigned int class_size)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> - unsigned long off = 0;
>>>>>> + struct page *endpage;
>>>>>> + unsigned int endoffset;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (!is_first_page(page))
>>>>>> - off = page->index;
>>>>>> + if (!page) {
>>>>>> + BUG_ON(offset);
>>>>>> + return NULL;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you expect to catch with above check?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This would catch cases where, say, user passes handle to a zero page to this function. In general, just a sanity check since pfn 0 and any non-zero offset is invalid.
>>>
>>> You mean zero_page is always pfn 0?
>>> No, we can't assume it.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, missed this point. Though it's not correct to embed the
>> assumption that the zero-page handle will have pfn of 0, but in
>> general, PFN 0 is always invalid. However, for 0 size requests
>
> Not true. PFN 0 is valid. Why do you think pfn 0 is invalid?
>
I thought PFN 0 must be reserved or already used during bootup, so no
chance of it getting swapped out and reaching zram.
>> zsmalloc returns NULL, so user should be also to pass <PFN=0,offset=0>
>> pair to this function. However, <PFN=0, offset!=0> is invalid and this
>
> I don't get it. If zs_malloc return 0, it means FAILED.
> How can user pass it in obj_location_to_handle?
>
zsmalloc also returns 0 as a result of zero sized request. In general,
malloc is supposed to treat zero-sized request as valid and is supposed
to return either 0 or a valid pointer in that case. So, in that user
should be able to pass on 0 to any zs_* API. Anyways, I don't consider
wither removing or keeping the assert as-is or just do BUG_ON(!page). so
any future cleanups could cleanup this BUG_ON if you feel like.
>> is what this assert checks.
>
> Although you are worry that someone might use the function in future,
> Just enough with below.
>
> BUG_ON(!page);
>
> The assertion isn't effecitve so we don't need that.
>
Ok, then we can clean this up in a future patch.
Thanks,
Nitin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists