linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 05/37] fs: Convert alloc_inode

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: <CAJuCfpFtXx=NH-Zykh+dfO2fAASV8eObLLxC4Fu_Zu2Y=idZuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 14:13:03 -0700
From: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: kent.overstreet@...ux.dev, mhocko@...e.com, vbabka@...e.cz, 
	hannes@...xchg.org, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, mgorman@...e.de, 
	dave@...olabs.net, willy@...radead.org, liam.howlett@...cle.com, 
	penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp, corbet@....net, void@...ifault.com, 
	peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, catalin.marinas@....com, 
	will@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, 
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, peterx@...hat.com, 
	david@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, mcgrof@...nel.org, masahiroy@...nel.org, 
	nathan@...nel.org, dennis@...nel.org, jhubbard@...dia.com, tj@...nel.org, 
	muchun.song@...ux.dev, rppt@...nel.org, paulmck@...nel.org, 
	pasha.tatashin@...een.com, yosryahmed@...gle.com, yuzhao@...gle.com, 
	dhowells@...hat.com, hughd@...gle.com, andreyknvl@...il.com, 
	keescook@...omium.org, ndesaulniers@...gle.com, vvvvvv@...gle.com, 
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, ebiggers@...gle.com, ytcoode@...il.com, 
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, 
	bsegall@...gle.com, bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com, cl@...ux.com, 
	penberg@...nel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com, 
	glider@...gle.com, elver@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com, 
	songmuchun@...edance.com, jbaron@...mai.com, aliceryhl@...gle.com, 
	rientjes@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com, 
	kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev, 
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, 
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 05/37] fs: Convert alloc_inode_sb() to a macro

On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 1:31 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:36:27 -0700 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
> >
> > We're introducing alloc tagging, which tracks memory allocations by
> > callsite. Converting alloc_inode_sb() to a macro means allocations will
> > be tracked by its caller, which is a bit more useful.
>
> I'd have thought that there would be many similar
> inlines-which-allocate-memory.  Such as, I dunno, jbd2_alloc_inode().
> Do we have to go converting things to macros as people report
> misleading or less useful results, or is there some more general
> solution to this?

Yeah, that's unfortunately inevitable. Even if we had compiler support
we would have to add annotations for such inlined functions.
For the given example of jbd2_alloc_inode() it's not so bad since it's
used only from one location but in general yes, that's something we
will have to improve as we find more such cases.

>
> > --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> > @@ -3083,11 +3083,7 @@ int setattr_should_drop_sgid(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
> >   * This must be used for allocating filesystems specific inodes to set
> >   * up the inode reclaim context correctly.
> >   */
> > -static inline void *
> > -alloc_inode_sb(struct super_block *sb, struct kmem_cache *cache, gfp_t gfp)
> > -{
> > -     return kmem_cache_alloc_lru(cache, &sb->s_inode_lru, gfp);
> > -}
> > +#define alloc_inode_sb(_sb, _cache, _gfp) kmem_cache_alloc_lru(_cache, &_sb->s_inode_lru, _gfp)
>
> Parenthesizing __sb seems sensible here?

Ack.
Let's wait for more comments and then I'll post fixes.
Thanks!