linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] mm/vmalloc: introduce vmalloc

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]

Date:   Wed, 13 Jul 2022 22:26:37 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Cc:     Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-modules@...r.kernel.org" <linux-modules@...r.kernel.org>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        "naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com" <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
        "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
        "dave@...olabs.net" <dave@...olabs.net>,
        "daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] mm/vmalloc: introduce vmalloc_exec which
 allocates RO+X memory

On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 03:48:35PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:

> > So how about instead we separate them? Then much of the problem goes
> > away, you don't need to track these 2M chunks at all.
> 
> If we manage the memory in < 2MiB granularity, either 4kB or smaller, 
> we still need some way to track which parts are being used, no? I mean
> the bitmap.  

I was thinking the vmalloc vmap_area tree could help out there.