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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 29 Oct 2018 20:21:18 +0200
From:   Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...il.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, igor.stoppa@...wei.com,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/17] prmem: struct page: track vmap_area

On 25/10/2018 03:13, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 02:01:02AM +0300, Igor Stoppa wrote:
>>>> @@ -1747,6 +1750,10 @@ void *__vmalloc_node_range(unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
>>>>    	if (!addr)
>>>>    		return NULL;
>>>> +	va = __find_vmap_area((unsigned long)addr);
>>>> +	for (i = 0; i < va->vm->nr_pages; i++)
>>>> +		va->vm->pages[i]->area = va;
>>>
>>> I don't like it that you're calling this for _every_ vmalloc() caller
>>> when most of them will never use this.  Perhaps have page->va be initially
>>> NULL and then cache the lookup in it when it's accessed for the first time.
>>>
>>
>> If __find_vmap_area() was part of the API, this loop could be left out from
>> __vmalloc_node_range() and the user of the allocation could initialize the
>> field, if needed.
>>
>> What is the reason for keeping __find_vmap_area() private?
> 
> Well, for one, you're walking the rbtree without holding the spinlock,
> so you're going to get crashes.  I don't see why we shouldn't export
> find_vmap_area() though.

Argh, yes, sorry. But find_vmap_area() would be enough for what I need.

> Another way we could approach this is to embed the vmap_area in the
> vm_struct.  It'd require a bit of juggling of the alloc/free paths in
> vmalloc, but it might be worthwhile.

I have a feeling of unease about the whole vmap_area / vm_struct 
duality. They clearly are different types, with different purposes, but 
here and there there are functions that are named after some "area", yet 
they actually refer to vm_struct pointers.

I wouldn't mind spending some time understanding the reason for this 
apparently bizarre choice, but after I have emerged from the prmem swamp.

For now I'd stick to find_vmap_area().

--
igor

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ