linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regset: use vmalloc() for regset_get

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: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 16:49:47 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
	Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regset: use vmalloc() for regset_get_alloc()

On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 08:24:17AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 8:05 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 03:49:25AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 07:15:48PM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, the next step would be to see which regset it is - if you
> > > > > see that kind of allocation, print regset->n, regset->size and
> > > > > regset->core_note_type.
> > > >
> > > > Of course! Here are the big ones:
> > > >
> > > > [   45.875574] DOUG: Allocating 279584 bytes, n=17474, size=16,
> > > > core_note_type=1029
> > >
> > > 0x405, NT_ARM_SVE
> > >         [REGSET_SVE] = { /* Scalable Vector Extension */
> > >                 .core_note_type = NT_ARM_SVE,
> > >                 .n = DIV_ROUND_UP(SVE_PT_SIZE(SVE_VQ_MAX, SVE_PT_REGS_SVE),
> > >                                   SVE_VQ_BYTES),
> > >                 .size = SVE_VQ_BYTES,
> > >
> > > IDGI.  Wasn't SVE up to 32 * 2Kbit, i.e. 8Kbyte max?  Any ARM folks around?
> > > Sure, I understand that it's variable-sized and we want to allocate enough
> > > for the worst case, but can we really get about 280Kb there?  Context switches
> > > would be really unpleasant on such boxen...
> >
> > FWIW, this apparently intends to be "variable, up to SVE_PT_SIZE(...) bytes";
> > no idea if SVE_PT_SIZE is the right thing to use here.
> 
> +folks from `./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c`
> 
> Trying to follow the macros to see where "n" comes from is a maze of
> twisty little passages, all alike. Hopefully someone from the ARM
> world can help tell if the value of 17474 for n here is correct or if
> something is wonky.

It might be interesting to have it print the return value of __regset_get()
in those cases; if *that* is huge, we really have a problem.  If it ends up
small enough to fit into few pages, OTOH...

SVE_VQ_MAX is defined as 255; is that really in units of 128 bits?  IOW,
do we really expect to support 32Kbit registers?  That would drive the
size into that range, all right, but it would really suck on context
switches.

I could be misreading it, though - the macros in there are not easy to
follow and I've never dealt with SVE before, so take the above with
a cartload of salt.