linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] slab: Fix too strict alignment check in create

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: <Zz6uRN_-mbo1CPzo@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 03:51:32 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: "Christoph Lameter (Ampere)" <cl@...two.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
	Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] slab: Fix too strict alignment check in create_cache()

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 09:50:47AM -0800, Christoph Lameter (Ampere) wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Nov 2024, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> 
> > >
> > > Fixes: aaa736b186239b7d ("io_uring: specify freeptr usage for SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU io_kiocb cache")
> > > Fixes: d345bd2e9834e2da ("mm: add kmem_cache_create_rcu()")
> > > Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/37c588d4-2c32-4aad-a19e-642961f200d7@roeck-us.net
> > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
> >
> > Thanks, will add it to slab pull for 6.13.
> 
> Note that there are widespread assumptions in kernel code that the
> alignment of scalars is the "natural alignment". Other portions of the
> kernel may break. The compiler actually goes along with this??

u64s aren't aligned on x86-32.  it's caused some problems over the
years, but things work ok in general.

> How do you deal with torn reads/writes in such a scenario? Is this UP
> only?

there were never a lot of smp m68k.  not sure i can think of one, tbh.
sun3 and hp300/400 seem like the obvious people who might have done an
smp m68k, but neither did.