linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] iio: core: simplify alloc alignment code

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]

Message-ID: <1d89df334b08486e73ca181cf9035d9af8fbccf2.camel@analog.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 May 2020 11:47:59 +0000
From:   "Ardelean, Alexandru" <alexandru.Ardelean@...log.com>
To:     "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com" 
        <linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        "Sa, Nuno" <Nuno.Sa@...log.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com" <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>,
        "nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com" <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
        "alexandre.torgue@...com" <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        "ak@...klinger.de" <ak@...klinger.de>,
        "jic23@...nel.org" <jic23@...nel.org>,
        "eugen.hristev@...rochip.com" <eugen.hristev@...rochip.com>,
        "mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com" <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        "alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com" <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] iio: core: simplify alloc alignment code

On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 07:12 +0000, Sa, Nuno wrote:
> Hey Alex,
> 
> Just a small question...
> 
> > From: linux-iio-owner@...r.kernel.org <linux-iio-owner@...r.kernel.org>
> > On Behalf Of Alexandru Ardelean
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 14. Mai 2020 15:17
> > To: linux-iio@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-
> > stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> > Cc: ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com; eugen.hristev@...rochip.com;
> > jic23@...nel.org; nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com;
> > alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com; alexandre.torgue@...com;
> > mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com; ak@...klinger.de; Ardelean, Alexandru
> > <alexandru.Ardelean@...log.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH v2 7/8] iio: core: simplify alloc alignment code
> > 
> > There was a recent discussion about this code:
> >   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/linux-
> > iio/20200322165317.0b1f0674@...hlinux/__;!!A3Ni8CS0y2Y!pgdUSayJCfxMiE
> > w8Fpv0LkEZurCSkX0sEcLnXeDSCLmhpu1xont6-vBQj3ZbCw$
> > 
> > This looks like a good time to rework this, since any issues about it
> > should pop-up under testing, because the iio_dev is having a bit of an
> > overhaul and stuff being moved to iio_dev_priv.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c | 10 +++-------
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c b/drivers/iio/industrialio-
> > core.c
> > index a1b29e0f8fd6..7671d36efae7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> > @@ -1514,13 +1514,9 @@ struct iio_dev *iio_device_alloc(int sizeof_priv)
> >  	struct iio_dev *dev;
> >  	size_t alloc_size;
> > 
> > -	alloc_size = sizeof(struct iio_dev_opaque);
> > -	if (sizeof_priv) {
> > -		alloc_size = ALIGN(alloc_size, IIO_ALIGN);
> > -		alloc_size += sizeof_priv;
> > -	}
> > -	/* ensure 32-byte alignment of whole construct ? */
> > -	alloc_size += IIO_ALIGN - 1;
> > +	alloc_size = ALIGN(sizeof(struct iio_dev_opaque), IIO_ALIGN);
> > +	if (sizeof_priv)
> > +		alloc_size += ALIGN(sizeof_priv, IIO_ALIGN);
> 
> Do we actually need to do the `ALIGN` again? It seems to me that `alloc_size
> += sizeof_priv`
> would be enough or am I missing something obvious?

Well, it's not always clear what value 'sizeof_priv' has, and whether it is
provided already aligned.
The requirement is usually that this data be cacheline aligned.

So, sizeof(struct iio_dev_opaque) is aligned already a few lines above, but the
private information should also be aligned [given that it's an unknown value
provided by the driver].
I think this is mostly important, if we need to do DMA access to buffers
allocated on the driver's state-struct, which is allocated here, and which is
usually provided as sizeof_priv.

Tbh, the discussions around this alignment/cacheline-alignment are a bit fuzzy
to me. I haven't run into any of these complicated issues.

> 
> - Nuno Sá
>