linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] lib: stackdepot: Add support to configure STACK_HASH

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: <50635706-e3b0-20da-a053-facb1430b1d1@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Tue, 5 Jan 2021 14:54:40 +0530
From:   Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@...eaurora.org>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     minchan@...nel.org, glider@...gle.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
        broonie@...nel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ylal@...eaurora.org,
        vinmenon@...eaurora.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] lib: stackdepot: Add support to configure
 STACK_HASH_SIZE



On 1/5/2021 4:42 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:15:30 +0530 vjitta@...eaurora.org wrote:
> 
>> Use STACK_HASH_ORDER_SHIFT to configure STACK_HASH_SIZE.
>>
>> Aim is to have configurable value for  STACK_HASH_SIZE,
>> so depend on use case one can configure it.
>>
>> One example is of Page Owner, default value of
>> STACK_HASH_SIZE lead stack depot to consume 8MB of static memory.
>> Making it configurable and use lower value helps to enable features like
>> CONFIG_PAGE_OWNER without any significant overhead.
> 
> Questions regarding the stackdepot code.
> 
> - stack_table_tmp[] is __initdata.  So after initmem is released,
>   that "consume 8MB of static memory" should no longer be true.  But
>   iirc, not all architectures actually release __initdata memory.  Does
>   your architecture do this?
> 
Thanks for review comments, I wasn't aware that __initdata is
architecture dependent, I was assuming that __initdata always frees
memory and yes the architecture which i am using (arm64) does free
__inidata.

> - Stackdepot copies stack_table_tmp[] into vmalloced memory during
>   initcalls.  Why?  Why not simply make stack_table_tmp[] no longer
>   __initdata and use that memory for all time?
> 
>   Presumably because in the stack_depot_disable==true case, we
>   release stack_table_tmp[] memory, don't vmalloc for a copy of it, and
>   save a bunch of memory?  If so, this assumes that the __initdata
>   memory is freed.
> 

Yes, that correct. assumption here is __initidata will free memory if
stack_depot_disable=true is set.

> - Why is that hash table so large?  Is it appropriately sized?
> 

I think the large size of hash table is justified since the users of
stack depot like kasan, page owner etc store a very large number of  stacks.

> - SMP is up and running during init_stackdepot(), I think?  If so, is
>   that huge memcpy smp-safe?  Can other CPUs be modifying
>   stack_table_tmp[] while the memcpy is in flight?
> 
> 
> 
Yes, parallel access could be possible. I will add a locking mechanism
inplace.

Thanks,
Vijay

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a
member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation