linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v3 -next] cma: Enforce non-zero pageblock_order during cma_init_reserved

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <62410f7d-2642-4218-8e8e-a384dbe86954@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 12:14:48 +0530
From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
To: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
 David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
 "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
 Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
 Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
 "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>,
 Donet Tom <donettom@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, LKML
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Sachin P Bappalige <sachinpb@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 -next] cma: Enforce non-zero pageblock_order during
 cma_init_reserved_mem()

On 10/11/24 20:26, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
> cma_init_reserved_mem() checks base and size alignment with
> CMA_MIN_ALIGNMENT_BYTES. However, some users might call this during
> early boot when pageblock_order is 0. That means if base and size does
> not have pageblock_order alignment, it can cause functional failures
> during cma activate area.
> 
> So let's enforce pageblock_order to be non-zero during
> cma_init_reserved_mem().
> 
> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@...il.com>
> ---
> v2 -> v3: Separated the series into 2 as discussed in v2.
> [v2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/cover.1728585512.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com/
> 
>  mm/cma.c | 9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/cma.c b/mm/cma.c
> index 3e9724716bad..36d753e7a0bf 100644
> --- a/mm/cma.c
> +++ b/mm/cma.c
> @@ -182,6 +182,15 @@ int __init cma_init_reserved_mem(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size,
>  	if (!size || !memblock_is_region_reserved(base, size))
>  		return -EINVAL;
> 
> +	/*
> +	 * CMA uses CMA_MIN_ALIGNMENT_BYTES as alignment requirement which
> +	 * needs pageblock_order to be initialized. Let's enforce it.
> +	 */
> +	if (!pageblock_order) {
> +		pr_err("pageblock_order not yet initialized. Called during early boot?\n");
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
>  	/* ensure minimal alignment required by mm core */
>  	if (!IS_ALIGNED(base | size, CMA_MIN_ALIGNMENT_BYTES))
>  		return -EINVAL;
> --
> 2.46.0
> 
> 

LGTM, hopefully this comment regarding CMA_MIN_ALIGNMENT_BYTES alignment
requirement will also probably remind us, to drop this new check in case
CMA_MIN_ALIGNMENT_BYTES no longer depends on pageblock_order later.

Reviewed-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>