[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <23273.49098.982175.973732@quad.stoffel.home>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 09:40:26 -0400
From: "John Stoffel" <john@...ffel.org>
To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
mst@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, jasowang@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
dm-devel@...hat.com, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] kvmalloc: always use vmalloc if CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
>>>>> "Mike" == Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com> writes:
Mike> On Tue, May 01 2018 at 8:36pm -0400,
Mike> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:33:01 -0400 (EDT) Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Tue 24-04-18 11:30:40, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Mon 23-04-18 20:25:15, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Fixing __vmalloc code
>> > > > > > is easy and it doesn't require cooperation with maintainers.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > But it is a hack against the intention of the scope api.
>> > > >
>> > > > It is not!
>> > >
>> > > This discussion simply doesn't make much sense it seems. The scope API
>> > > is to document the scope of the reclaim recursion critical section. That
>> > > certainly is not a utility function like vmalloc.
>> >
>> > That 15-line __vmalloc bugfix doesn't prevent you (or any other kernel
>> > developer) from converting the code to the scope API. You make nonsensical
>> > excuses.
>> >
>>
>> Fun thread!
>>
>> Winding back to the original problem, I'd state it as
>>
>> - Caller uses kvmalloc() but passes the address into vmalloc-naive
>> DMA API and
>>
>> - Caller uses kvmalloc() but passes the address into kfree()
>>
>> Yes?
Mike> I think so.
>> If so, then...
>>
>> Is there a way in which, in the kvmalloc-called-kmalloc path, we can
>> tag the slab-allocated memory with a "this memory was allocated with
>> kvmalloc()" flag? I *think* there's extra per-object storage available
>> with suitable slab/slub debugging options? Perhaps we could steal one
>> bit from the redzone, dunno.
>>
>> If so then we can
>>
>> a) set that flag in kvmalloc() if the kmalloc() call succeeded
>>
>> b) check for that flag in the DMA code, WARN if it is set.
>>
>> c) in kvfree(), clear that flag before calling kfree()
>>
>> d) in kfree(), check for that flag and go WARN() if set.
>>
>> So both potential bugs are detected all the time, dependent upon
>> CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG (and perhaps other slub config options).
Mike> Thanks Andrew, definitely the most sane proposal I've seen to resolve
Mike> this.
Cuts to the heart of the issue I think, and seems pretty sane. Should
the WARN be rate limited as well?
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists