| 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: <20190102170537.GA3591@rapoport-lnx>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2019 19:05:38 +0200
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@...il.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Yaowei Bai <baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
Daniel Vacek <neelx@...hat.com>,
Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>,
Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>, Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
yinghai@...nel.org, vgoyal@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/2] mm/memblock: extend the limit inferior of
bottom-up after parsing hotplug attr
(added Tejun)
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 06:18:04PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> On 01/02/19 at 11:27am, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 02:47:34PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 4:40 PM Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 11:00:01AM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> > > > > The bottom-up allocation style is introduced to cope with movable_node,
> > > > > where the limit inferior of allocation starts from kernel's end, due to
> > > > > lack of knowledge of memory hotplug info at this early time. But if later,
> > > > > hotplug info has been got, the limit inferior can be extend to 0.
> > > > > 'kexec -c' prefers to reuse this style to alloc mem at lower address,
> > > > > since if the reserved region is beyond 4G, then it requires extra mem
> > > > > (default is 16M) for swiotlb.
> > > >
> > > > I fail to understand why the availability of memory hotplug information
> > > > would allow to extend the lower limit of bottom-up memblock allocations
> > > > below the kernel. The memory in the physical range [0, kernel_start) can be
> > > > allocated as soon as the kernel memory is reserved.
> > > >
> > > Yes, the [0, kernel_start) can be allocated at this time by some func
> > > e.g. memblock_reserve(). But there is trick. For the func like
> > > memblock_find_in_range(), this is hotplug attr checking ,,it will
> > > check the hotmovable attr in __next_mem_range()
> > > {
> > > if (movable_node_is_enabled() && memblock_is_hotpluggable(m))
> > > continue
> > > }. So the movable memory can be safely skipped.
> >
> > I still don't see the connection between allocating memory below
> > kernel_start and the hotplug info.
> >
> > The check for 'end > kernel_end' in
> >
> > if (memblock_bottom_up() && end > kernel_end)
> >
> > does not protect against allocation in a hotplugable area.
> > If memblock_find_in_range() is called before hotplug info is parsed it can
> > return a range in a hotplugable area.
> >
> > The point I'd like to clarify is why allocating memory in the range [0,
> > kernel_start) cannot be done before hotplug info is available and why it is
> > safe to allocate that memory afterwards?
>
> Well, I think that's because we have KASLR. Before KASLR was introdueced,
> kernel is put at a low and fixed physical address. Allocating memblock
> bottom-up after kernel can make sure those kernel data is in the same node
> as kernel text itself before SRAT parsed. While [0, kernel_start) is a
> very small range, e.g on x86, it was 16 MB, which is very possibly used
> up.
>
> But now, with KASLR enabled by default, this bottom-up after kernel text
> allocation has potential issue. E.g we have node0 (including normal zone),
> node1(including movable zone), if KASLR put kernel at top of node0, the
> next memblock allocation before SRAT parsed will stamp into movable zone
> of node1, hotplug doesn't work well any more consequently. I had
> considered this issue previously, but haven't thought of a way to fix
> it.
I agree that currently the bottom-up allocation after the kernel text has
issues with KASLR. But this issues are not necessarily related to the
memory hotplug. Even with a single memory node, a bottom-up allocation will
fail if KASLR would put the kernel near the end of node0.
What I am trying to understand is whether there is a fundamental reason to
prevent allocations from [0, kernel_start)?
Maybe Tejun can recall why he suggested to start bottom-up allocations from
kernel_end.
> While it's not related to this patch. About this patchset, I didn't
> check it carefully in v2 post, and acked it. In fact the current way is
> not good, Pingfan should call __memblock_find_range_bottom_up() directly
> for crashkernel reserving. Reasons are:
> 1)SRAT parsing is done, system restore to take top-down way to do
> memblock allocat.
> 2)we do need to find range bottom-up if user specify crashkernel=xxM
> (without a explicit base address).
>
> Thanks
> Baoquan
>
> >
> > > Thanks for your kindly review.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Pingfan
> > >
> > > > The extents of the memory node hosting the kernel image can be used to
> > > > limit memblok allocations from that particular node, even in top-down mode.
> > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@...il.com>
> > > > > Cc: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
> > > > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
> > > > > Cc: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
> > > > > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> > > > > Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > > Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> > > > > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
> > > > > Cc: Yaowei Bai <baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com>
> > > > > Cc: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>
> > > > > Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
> > > > > Cc: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
> > > > > Cc: Daniel Vacek <neelx@...hat.com>
> > > > > Cc: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>
> > > > > Cc: Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>
> > > > > Cc: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
> > > > > Cc: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
> > > > > Cc: yinghai@...nel.org,
> > > > > Cc: vgoyal@...hat.com
> > > > > Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/acpi/numa.c | 4 ++++
> > > > > include/linux/memblock.h | 1 +
> > > > > mm/memblock.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> > > > > 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/numa.c b/drivers/acpi/numa.c
> > > > > index 2746994..3eea4e4 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/numa.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/numa.c
> > > > > @@ -462,6 +462,10 @@ int __init acpi_numa_init(void)
> > > > >
> > > > > cnt = acpi_table_parse_srat(ACPI_SRAT_TYPE_MEMORY_AFFINITY,
> > > > > acpi_parse_memory_affinity, 0);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_X86) || defined(CONFIG_ARM64)
> > > > > + mark_mem_hotplug_parsed();
> > > > > +#endif
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > /* SLIT: System Locality Information Table */
> > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > > > index aee299a..d89ed9e 100644
> > > > > --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > > > +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > > > @@ -125,6 +125,7 @@ int memblock_reserve(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> > > > > void memblock_trim_memory(phys_addr_t align);
> > > > > bool memblock_overlaps_region(struct memblock_type *type,
> > > > > phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> > > > > +void mark_mem_hotplug_parsed(void);
> > > > > int memblock_mark_hotplug(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> > > > > int memblock_clear_hotplug(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> > > > > int memblock_mark_mirror(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> > > > > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
> > > > > index 81ae63c..a3f5e46 100644
> > > > > --- a/mm/memblock.c
> > > > > +++ b/mm/memblock.c
> > > > > @@ -231,6 +231,12 @@ __memblock_find_range_top_down(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
> > > > > return 0;
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > +static bool mem_hotmovable_parsed __initdata_memblock;
> > > > > +void __init_memblock mark_mem_hotplug_parsed(void)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + mem_hotmovable_parsed = true;
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +
> > > > > /**
> > > > > * memblock_find_in_range_node - find free area in given range and node
> > > > > * @size: size of free area to find
> > > > > @@ -259,7 +265,7 @@ phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_in_range_node(phys_addr_t size,
> > > > > phys_addr_t end, int nid,
> > > > > enum memblock_flags flags)
> > > > > {
> > > > > - phys_addr_t kernel_end, ret;
> > > > > + phys_addr_t kernel_end, ret = 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > /* pump up @end */
> > > > > if (end == MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE)
> > > > > @@ -270,34 +276,40 @@ phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_in_range_node(phys_addr_t size,
> > > > > end = max(start, end);
> > > > > kernel_end = __pa_symbol(_end);
> > > > >
> > > > > - /*
> > > > > - * try bottom-up allocation only when bottom-up mode
> > > > > - * is set and @end is above the kernel image.
> > > > > - */
> > > > > - if (memblock_bottom_up() && end > kernel_end) {
> > > > > - phys_addr_t bottom_up_start;
> > > > > + if (memblock_bottom_up()) {
> > > > > + phys_addr_t bottom_up_start = start;
> > > > >
> > > > > - /* make sure we will allocate above the kernel */
> > > > > - bottom_up_start = max(start, kernel_end);
> > > > > -
> > > > > - /* ok, try bottom-up allocation first */
> > > > > - ret = __memblock_find_range_bottom_up(bottom_up_start, end,
> > > > > - size, align, nid, flags);
> > > > > - if (ret)
> > > > > + if (mem_hotmovable_parsed) {
> > > > > + ret = __memblock_find_range_bottom_up(
> > > > > + bottom_up_start, end, size, align, nid,
> > > > > + flags);
> > > > > return ret;
> > > > >
> > > > > /*
> > > > > - * we always limit bottom-up allocation above the kernel,
> > > > > - * but top-down allocation doesn't have the limit, so
> > > > > - * retrying top-down allocation may succeed when bottom-up
> > > > > - * allocation failed.
> > > > > - *
> > > > > - * bottom-up allocation is expected to be fail very rarely,
> > > > > - * so we use WARN_ONCE() here to see the stack trace if
> > > > > - * fail happens.
> > > > > + * if mem hotplug info is not parsed yet, try bottom-up
> > > > > + * allocation with @end above the kernel image.
> > > > > */
> > > > > - WARN_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTREMOVE),
> > > > > + } else if (!mem_hotmovable_parsed && end > kernel_end) {
> > > > > + /* make sure we will allocate above the kernel */
> > > > > + bottom_up_start = max(start, kernel_end);
> > > > > + ret = __memblock_find_range_bottom_up(
> > > > > + bottom_up_start, end, size, align, nid,
> > > > > + flags);
> > > > > + if (ret)
> > > > > + return ret;
> > > > > + /*
> > > > > + * we always limit bottom-up allocation above the
> > > > > + * kernel, but top-down allocation doesn't have
> > > > > + * the limit, so retrying top-down allocation may
> > > > > + * succeed when bottom-up allocation failed.
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + * bottom-up allocation is expected to be fail
> > > > > + * very rarely, so we use WARN_ONCE() here to see
> > > > > + * the stack trace if fail happens.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > + WARN_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTREMOVE),
> > > > > "memblock: bottom-up allocation failed, memory hotremove may be affected\n");
> > > > > + }
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > return __memblock_find_range_top_down(start, end, size, align, nid,
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.7.4
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sincerely yours,
> > > > Mike.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Sincerely yours,
> > Mike.
> >
>
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists