linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/12] mempolicy: mpol_shared_policy

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: <4fe84029-ad5-63cb-f2a7-3c83ea427bf1@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2023 14:36:25 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
cc:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
        Sidhartha Kumar <sidhartha.kumar@...cle.com>,
        Vishal Moola <vishal.moola@...il.com>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] mempolicy: mpol_shared_policy_init() without
 pseudo-vma

On Mon, 25 Sep 2023, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 01:29:28AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > +		/* alloc node covering entire file; adds ref to new */
> 
> This comment is confusing.  sp_alloc initialises the refcount of 'n' to 1.
> Which is the same memory referred to by the name 'new' in __mpol_dup(),
> but in this function, the name "new" refers to the mempolicy called
> "old" in __mpol_dup().

No promises, but I'll see if I can make it look better in v2.

> 
> > +		n = sp_alloc(0, MAX_LFS_FILESIZE >> PAGE_SHIFT, new);
> > +		if (n)
> > +			sp_insert(sp, n);
> >  put_new:
> >  		mpol_put(new);			/* drop initial ref */
> >  free_scratch:
> 
> This is all a bit inefficient, really.  We call mpol_new() to get a
> new mpol, then we set it up, then we dup it, then we free it.  It'd
> be nice if we could donate it instead of copying it.  Maybe you'll
> do something like that later.

"later" is probably the operative word.  I do have an unincluded 2017
patch where I had that same realization, and wrote "I suspect that this
series of commits may be adding to an absurdity of over-mpol_dup()ing:
but that's for some other future cleanup, right now I'm just happy not
to be corrupting or leaking mpols."

Hugh