[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180502133224.GA22123@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 09:33:01 -0400
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...hat.com,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, mst@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jasowang@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
edumazet@...gle.com, Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: kvmalloc: always use vmalloc if CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
On Tue, May 01 2018 at 8:36pm -0400,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:33:01 -0400 (EDT) Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue 24-04-18 11:30:40, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon 23-04-18 20:25:15, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Fixing __vmalloc code
> > > > > > is easy and it doesn't require cooperation with maintainers.
> > > > >
> > > > > But it is a hack against the intention of the scope api.
> > > >
> > > > It is not!
> > >
> > > This discussion simply doesn't make much sense it seems. The scope API
> > > is to document the scope of the reclaim recursion critical section. That
> > > certainly is not a utility function like vmalloc.
> >
> > That 15-line __vmalloc bugfix doesn't prevent you (or any other kernel
> > developer) from converting the code to the scope API. You make nonsensical
> > excuses.
> >
>
> Fun thread!
>
> Winding back to the original problem, I'd state it as
>
> - Caller uses kvmalloc() but passes the address into vmalloc-naive
> DMA API and
>
> - Caller uses kvmalloc() but passes the address into kfree()
>
> Yes?
I think so.
> If so, then...
>
> Is there a way in which, in the kvmalloc-called-kmalloc path, we can
> tag the slab-allocated memory with a "this memory was allocated with
> kvmalloc()" flag? I *think* there's extra per-object storage available
> with suitable slab/slub debugging options? Perhaps we could steal one
> bit from the redzone, dunno.
>
> If so then we can
>
> a) set that flag in kvmalloc() if the kmalloc() call succeeded
>
> b) check for that flag in the DMA code, WARN if it is set.
>
> c) in kvfree(), clear that flag before calling kfree()
>
> d) in kfree(), check for that flag and go WARN() if set.
>
> So both potential bugs are detected all the time, dependent upon
> CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG (and perhaps other slub config options).
Thanks Andrew, definitely the most sane proposal I've seen to resolve
this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists