netdev - Re: ipv4/tcp.c:4234:1: error: the frame size of 1152 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]

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: <36aa5cb7-e3d6-33cb-9ac6-c9ff1169d711@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 8 Sep 2021 08:11:36 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Ariel Elior <aelior@...vell.com>,
        GR-everest-linux-l2@...vell.com, Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>
Cc:     Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: ipv4/tcp.c:4234:1: error: the frame size of 1152 bytes is larger
 than 1024 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]

On 9/7/21 5:14 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [ Added maintainers for various bits and pieces, since I spent the
> time trying to look at why those bits and pieces wasted stack-space
> and caused problems ]
> 
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 3:16 PM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> None of these seem to be new.
> 
> That said, all but one of them seem to be (a) very much worth fixing
> and (b) easy to fix.
> 
> The do_tcp_getsockopt() one in tpc.c is a classic case of "lots of
> different case statements, many of them with their own struct
> allocations on stack, and all of them disjoint".
> 
> So the fix for that would be the traditional one of just making helper
> functions for the cases that aren't entirely trivial. We've done that
> before, and it not only fixes stack usage problems, it results in code
> that is easier to read, and generally actually performs better too
> (exactly because it avoids sparse stacks and extra D$ use)
> 
> The pe_test_uints() one is the same horrendous nasty Kunit pattern
> that I fixed in commit 4b93c544e90e ("thunderbolt: test: split up test
> cases in tb_test_credit_alloc_all") that had an even worse case.
> 
> The KUNIT macros create all these individually reasonably small
> initialized structures on stack, and when you have more than a small
> handful of them the KUNIT infrastructure just makes the stack space
> explode. Sometimes the compiler will be able to re-use the stack
> slots, but it seems to be an iffy proposition to depend on it - it
> seems to be a combination of luck and various config options.
> 

I have been concerned about these macros creeping in for a while.
I will take a closer look and work with Brendan to come with a plan
to address it.

> I detest code that exists for debugging or for testing, and that
> violates fundamental rules and causes more problems in the process.
> 

Having recently debugged a problem spinlock hold in an invalid context
related to debug code, I agree with you on this that test and debug code
shouldn't cause problems.

thanks,
-- Shuah