linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 09/16] rcu/tree: Maintain separate array for vmalloc ptrs

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: <20200618182333.GA15082@pc636>
Date:   Thu, 18 Jun 2020 20:23:33 +0200
From:   Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Theodore Y . Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        RCU <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
        Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...ymobile.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/16] rcu/tree: Maintain separate array for vmalloc
 ptrs

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:15:41AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 07:56:23PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > If we mix pointers, then we can do free per pointer only. I mean in that
> > case we will not be able to use kfree_bulk() interface for freeing SLAB
> > memory and the code would converted to something like:
> > 
> > <snip>
> > while (nr_objects_in_array > 0) {
> >     if (is_vmalloc_addr(array[X]))
> >        vfree(array[X]);
> >     else
> >        kfree(array[X]);
> > }
> > <snip>
> 
> [PATCH] Add vfree_bulk interface
> 
> This is a useful interface to have for the RCU kvfree code.  There is
> scope for more performance gains later, but introducing the interface
> now allows us to simplify the RCU code today.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@...radead.org>
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/vmalloc.h b/include/linux/vmalloc.h
> index 48bb681e6c2a..dc2bbb61af61 100644
> --- a/include/linux/vmalloc.h
> +++ b/include/linux/vmalloc.h
> @@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ void *__vmalloc_node(unsigned long size, unsigned long align, gfp_t gfp_mask,
>  
>  extern void vfree(const void *addr);
>  extern void vfree_atomic(const void *addr);
> +extern void vfree_bulk(size_t count, void **addrs);
>  
>  extern void *vmap(struct page **pages, unsigned int count,
>  			unsigned long flags, pgprot_t prot);
> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> index abe37f09ac42..6042f9b4394a 100644
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -2366,6 +2366,22 @@ void vfree(const void *addr)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(vfree);
>  
> +void vfree_bulk(size_t count, void **addrs)
> +{
> +	unsigned int i;
> +
> +	BUG_ON(in_nmi());
> +	might_sleep_if(!in_interrupt());
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> +		void *addr = addrs[i];
> +		kmemleak_free(addr);
> +		if (addr)
> +			__vfree(addr);
> +	}
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(vfree_bulk);
> +
>
Can we just do addrs[i] all over the loop?

Also, we can just call vfree() instead that has all checking we
need: NMI, kmemleak, might_sleep.

Thanks!

--
Vlad Rezki