linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 19/57] crash: Remove PAGE

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: <2e561511-ab20-4aa9-9b92-bd6ac6678087@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 12:13:55 +0100
From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
 Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
 David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Greg Marsden
 <greg.marsden@...cle.com>, Ivan Ivanov <ivan.ivanov@...e.com>,
 Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Matthias Brugger <mbrugger@...e.com>,
 Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 19/57] crash: Remove PAGE_SIZE compile-time
 constant assumption

On 15/10/2024 04:47, Baoquan He wrote:
> On 10/14/24 at 11:58am, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> To prepare for supporting boot-time page size selection, refactor code
>> to remove assumptions about PAGE_SIZE being compile-time constant. Code
>> intended to be equivalent when compile-time page size is active.
>>
>> Updated BUILD_BUG_ON() to test against limit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
>> ---
>>
>> ***NOTE***
>> Any confused maintainers may want to read the cover note here for context:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241014105514.3206191-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com/
>>
>>  kernel/crash_core.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/crash_core.c b/kernel/crash_core.c
>> index 63cf89393c6eb..978c600a47ac8 100644
>> --- a/kernel/crash_core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/crash_core.c
>> @@ -465,7 +465,7 @@ static int __init crash_notes_memory_init(void)
>>  	 * Break compile if size is bigger than PAGE_SIZE since crash_notes
>>  	 * definitely will be in 2 pages with that.
>>  	 */
>> -	BUILD_BUG_ON(size > PAGE_SIZE);
>> +	BUILD_BUG_ON(size > PAGE_SIZE_MIN);
> 
> This should be OK. While one thing which could happen is if selected size
> is 64K, PAGE_SIZE_MIN is 4K, it will issue a false-positive warning when
> compiling while actual it's not a problem during running. 

PAGE_SIZE can only ever be bigger than PAGE_SIZE_MIN if compiling a "boot-time
page size" build. And in this case, you need to know that size is small enough
to work with any of the boot-time selectable page sizes. Since size
(=sizeof(note_buf_t)) is invariant to PAGE_SIZE, we can do this by checking
against PAGE_SIZE_MIN.

So I don't think this could ever lead to a false-positive.


Not sure if
> that could happen on arm64. Anyway, we can check the crash_notes to get
> why it's so big when it really happens. So,
> 
> Acked-by: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>

Thanks!

> 
>>  
>>  	crash_notes = __alloc_percpu(size, align);
>>  	if (!crash_notes) {
>> -- 
>> 2.43.0
>>
>>
>