linux-kernel - Re: kmemleak panic

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3c886941-bf9d-f040-b568-ee7a8eba9a04@free.fr>
Date:   Tue, 22 Jan 2019 15:12:54 +0100
From:   Marc Gonzalez <marc.w.gonzalez@...e.fr>
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Prateek Patel <prpatel@...dia.com>,
        Sachin Nikam <snikam@...dia.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>
Cc:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Qian Cai <cai@....pw>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kmemleak panic

On 22/01/2019 15:02, Marc Gonzalez wrote:

> On 21/01/2019 18:42, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> 
>> If I understood correctly, the trouble comes from no-map range allocated in 
>> early_init_dt_alloc_reserved_memory_arch().
>>
>> There's indeed imbalance, because memblock_alloc() does kmemleak_alloc(), but
>> memblock_remove() does not do kmemleak_free().
>>
>> I think the best way is to replace __memblock_alloc_base() with
>> memblock_find_in_range(), e.g something like:
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
>> index 1977ee0adcb1..6807a1cffe55 100644
>> --- a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
>> +++ b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
>> @@ -37,21 +37,16 @@ int __init __weak early_init_dt_alloc_reserved_memory_arch(phys_addr_t size,
>>  	 */
>>  	end = !end ? MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE : end;
>>  	align = !align ? SMP_CACHE_BYTES : align;
>> -	base = __memblock_alloc_base(size, align, end);
>> +	base = memblock_find_in_range(size, align, start, end);
>>  	if (!base)
>>  		return -ENOMEM;
>>  
>> -	/*
>> -	 * Check if the allocated region fits in to start..end window
>> -	 */
>> -	if (base < start) {
>> -		memblock_free(base, size);
>> -		return -ENOMEM;
>> -	}
>> -
>>  	*res_base = base;
>>  	if (nomap)
>>  		return memblock_remove(base, size);
>> +	else
>> +		return memblock_reserve(base, size);
>> +
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>>  
> 
> Your patch solves the issue. \o/

[ Add nvidia devs, but drop schowdary@...dia.com ]