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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 2 Nov 2018 22:56:34 +0200
From:   Alexey Skidanov <alexey.skidanov@...el.com>
To:     Daniel Mentz <danielmentz@...gle.com>
Cc:     Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.co>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, labbott@...hat.com
Subject: Re: lib/genalloc



On 11/2/18 9:17 PM, Daniel Mentz wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:07 AM Alexey Skidanov
> <alexey.skidanov@...el.com> wrote:
>> On 11/1/18 18:48, Stephen  Bates wrote:
>>>>    I use gen_pool_first_fit_align() as pool allocation algorithm allocating
>>>>    buffers with requested alignment. But if a chunk base address is not
>>>>    aligned to the requested alignment(from some reason), the returned
>>>>    address is not aligned too.
>>>
>>> Alexey
>>>
>>> Can you try using gen_pool_first_fit_order_align()? Will that give you the alignment you need?
>>>
>>> Stephen
>>>
>>>
>> I think it will not help me. Let's assume that the chunk base address is
>> 0x2F400000 and I want to allocate 16MB aligned buffer. I get back the
>> 0x2F400000. I think it happens because of this string in the
>> gen_pool_alloc_algo():
>>
>> addr = chunk->start_addr + ((unsigned long)start_bit << order);
>>
>> and the gen_pool_first_fit_align() implementation that doesn't take into
>> account the "incorrect" chunk base alignment.
> 
> gen_pool_first_fit_align() has no information about the chunk base
> alignment. Hence, it can't take it into account.
> 
> How do you request the alignment in your code?
> 
> I agree with your analysis that gen_pool_first_fit_align() performs
> alignment only with respect to the start of the chunk not the memory
> address that gen_pool_alloc_algo() returns. I guess a solution would
> be to only add chunks that satisfy all your alignment requirements. In
> your case, you must only add chunks that are 16MB aligned.
> I am unsure whether this is by design, but I believe it's the way that
> the code currently works.
> 

Daniel,

I think the better solution is to use bitmap_find_next_zero_area_off()
that receives the bit offset (CMA allocator uses it to solve the same
issue). Of course, we need to pass the chunk base address to the
gen_pool_first_fit_align().

What do you think?

Thanks,
Alexey

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ