From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-23.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57631C433DB for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:53:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6F4A64FF3 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:53:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231993AbhCJMwt (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:52:49 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38698 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229660AbhCJMwQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:52:16 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-x532.google.com (mail-pg1-x532.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::532]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB739C061760 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg1-x532.google.com with SMTP id x29so11350681pgk.6 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/BK42rEfZDnxMm7tn7QJoRMRkMDyVR3i3bNbcPekdIg=; b=h3fEZUkobZr1jCHE1WazBNRG4q6cvgfOa2N+PfxLN8F7RZJkzgxy8/c570n7v1gsgE wSVCeFTC/83l9s7h3AlU7OrKC5RGtvsuxScUqY6IJhXjcghZQ8EL07clpakh4MTYsG7o 6KoC27yoGboGzxYaB+5W8my72cxKXJZYwPWTh6e8c4ZfV+hRQj3DRwvP3l72LQhNw298 sOkfAxTRzwbtQwEezjar0b8cKncz7NqR60/GEO5Od0xr52s3xXhE73SXrE4cXBPxJIlS lmmdDl8v0ikLdUjBpWCTlgfWxaqXztaooul2c927TtNy00/RKZdi/4PbDlNVnuRV13n1 rroQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/BK42rEfZDnxMm7tn7QJoRMRkMDyVR3i3bNbcPekdIg=; b=ThWfts9PhBHey9dOYlCjETDwRs6txslNk4taATsm27nJpeuwJEGonCfT+CauK2uAgB srnLqYUTK1a/Av1Gp3QzAk4ayosC87ZE0QuUYsjOnu8R7vafUH02JczeylxlcBvSNVQg p8KVFg/6TYhYtTG5hSUhWuVltEbKejcJ2Cg8p+Q/lPcuw1KKgIgxBYEbUdymELj+JLUr s0wMaC72QFJKPFcHsROu+Gd1YtYu5l1tHIVoWNlA6woxNi6sqglWufAeKFFWtIxs02fz H+HK93BLGFM7n/fJ6lA0poR2Gn90GOK7MKwMXZ0R6cpQSRE86/HKhlPJJ1BouYlR3NMF JyMA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530JBVps0mgSKWk85jxolCtJ58SJGQbXqJcIR7ottvrST3gJP8lW TSA/u+PaVG+9wBoHYFMyRWUdXrLqHOeyh5CDvksG4A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz6Al6cQ9o2Jkic0AM6aT+uI8HXaIO3FGRdEqDpDV6bZgYd+QRynVKdHFUIi1JAN2QCB/oYogOY84k0cBj6NyQ= X-Received: by 2002:a63:455d:: with SMTP id u29mr2647321pgk.286.1615380735994; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210309214301.678739-1-keescook@chromium.org> <20210309214301.678739-4-keescook@chromium.org> In-Reply-To: <20210309214301.678739-4-keescook@chromium.org> From: Andrey Konovalov Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:52:04 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/7] init_on_alloc: Unpessimize default-on builds To: Kees Cook , Alexander Potapenko Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Elena Reshetova , "the arch/x86 maintainers" , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , Alexander Popov , Ard Biesheuvel , Jann Horn , kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, Linux ARM , Linux Memory Management List , LKML , Vlastimil Babka , David Hildenbrand , Mike Rapoport , Andrew Morton , Jonathan Corbet , Randy Dunlap Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 10:43 PM Kees Cook wrote: > > Right now, the state of CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON (and > ...ON_FREE...) did not change the assembly ordering of the static branch > tests. Use the new jump_label macro to check CONFIG settings to default > to the "expected" state, unpessimizes the resulting assembly code. > > Reviewed-by: Alexander Potapenko > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAG_fn=X0DVwqLaHJTO6Jw7TGcMSm77GKHinrd0m_6y0SzWOrFA@mail.gmail.com/ > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook > --- > include/linux/mm.h | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h > index bf341a9bfe46..2ccd856ac0d1 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mm.h > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h > @@ -2874,7 +2874,8 @@ static inline void kernel_unpoison_pages(struct page *page, int numpages) { } > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_MAYBE(CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON, init_on_alloc); > static inline bool want_init_on_alloc(gfp_t flags) > { > - if (static_branch_unlikely(&init_on_alloc)) > + if (static_branch_maybe(CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON, > + &init_on_alloc)) > return true; > return flags & __GFP_ZERO; > } > @@ -2882,7 +2883,8 @@ static inline bool want_init_on_alloc(gfp_t flags) > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_MAYBE(CONFIG_INIT_ON_FREE_DEFAULT_ON, init_on_free); > static inline bool want_init_on_free(void) > { > - return static_branch_unlikely(&init_on_free); > + return static_branch_maybe(CONFIG_INIT_ON_FREE_DEFAULT_ON, > + &init_on_free); > } > > extern bool _debug_pagealloc_enabled_early; Should we also update slab_want_init_on_alloc() and slab_want_init_on_free()? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-23.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C779AC433E0 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:52:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2919264FEF for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:52:19 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2919264FEF Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 4AF9A8D01AB; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:52:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 460158D01A9; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:52:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 300008D01AB; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:52:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0033.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.33]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1484E8D01A9 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 07:52:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC35068BF for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:52:17 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77903952714.08.190942F Received: from mail-pf1-f170.google.com (mail-pf1-f170.google.com [209.85.210.170]) by imf20.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA10FDA for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f170.google.com with SMTP id x7so8552894pfi.7 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/BK42rEfZDnxMm7tn7QJoRMRkMDyVR3i3bNbcPekdIg=; b=h3fEZUkobZr1jCHE1WazBNRG4q6cvgfOa2N+PfxLN8F7RZJkzgxy8/c570n7v1gsgE wSVCeFTC/83l9s7h3AlU7OrKC5RGtvsuxScUqY6IJhXjcghZQ8EL07clpakh4MTYsG7o 6KoC27yoGboGzxYaB+5W8my72cxKXJZYwPWTh6e8c4ZfV+hRQj3DRwvP3l72LQhNw298 sOkfAxTRzwbtQwEezjar0b8cKncz7NqR60/GEO5Od0xr52s3xXhE73SXrE4cXBPxJIlS lmmdDl8v0ikLdUjBpWCTlgfWxaqXztaooul2c927TtNy00/RKZdi/4PbDlNVnuRV13n1 rroQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/BK42rEfZDnxMm7tn7QJoRMRkMDyVR3i3bNbcPekdIg=; b=cK84wI/Nz4+Yz9up4Si3BHBdZ2pZ1IB3pwGpMvIjCbnVUpleF1oZamHaLIN8X7sItA YgA5Xvk7tFhAsAgaJj5R9uNSRQceh7hB3oWzoDwm/ZH63j/rkzL9INoOat6nwDtJ+b69 Ztgj5VjIOP2vE/E2Rk8i+kvw7YUCs9BG7Hfpy0q7T3LJhHHi647dX6NZ5Ya6u20uNynz VXAdoDakoRl/8VN5xgn3G/IgvqY38Mj/KXZzcoNBM6cwvK/FrWpuaeJRMNK3nTrKGD/c KxDI5SdkOSwU12B3JD7DaPNvBTMVy1qNY7DfMd43f1rxndzOtNVwbct0bwLiDj3QJRy7 KKcA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532lcLs8e+l8kE0y33YykMtMiPJR8anJFz+05EnXTpH7sKYz9ZYB yj+4tAZ5TGPonjxZkRqBt6l77c0pAbiff0xE5gVpQw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz6Al6cQ9o2Jkic0AM6aT+uI8HXaIO3FGRdEqDpDV6bZgYd+QRynVKdHFUIi1JAN2QCB/oYogOY84k0cBj6NyQ= X-Received: by 2002:a63:455d:: with SMTP id u29mr2647321pgk.286.1615380735994; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210309214301.678739-1-keescook@chromium.org> <20210309214301.678739-4-keescook@chromium.org> In-Reply-To: <20210309214301.678739-4-keescook@chromium.org> From: Andrey Konovalov Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:52:04 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/7] init_on_alloc: Unpessimize default-on builds To: Kees Cook , Alexander Potapenko Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Elena Reshetova , "the arch/x86 maintainers" , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , Alexander Popov , Ard Biesheuvel , Jann Horn , kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, Linux ARM , Linux Memory Management List , LKML , Vlastimil Babka , David Hildenbrand , Mike Rapoport , Andrew Morton , Jonathan Corbet , Randy Dunlap Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: AA10FDA X-Stat-Signature: cdn1wjbx5th7t46jkm87ptgajzr8cg5t Received-SPF: none (google.com>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf20; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=mail-pf1-f170.google.com; client-ip=209.85.210.170 X-HE-DKIM-Result: pass/pass X-HE-Tag: 1615380733-618883 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 10:43 PM Kees Cook wrote: > > Right now, the state of CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON (and > ...ON_FREE...) did not change the assembly ordering of the static branch > tests. Use the new jump_label macro to check CONFIG settings to default > to the "expected" state, unpessimizes the resulting assembly code. > > Reviewed-by: Alexander Potapenko > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAG_fn=X0DVwqLaHJTO6Jw7TGcMSm77GKHinrd0m_6y0SzWOrFA@mail.gmail.com/ > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook > --- > include/linux/mm.h | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h > index bf341a9bfe46..2ccd856ac0d1 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mm.h > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h > @@ -2874,7 +2874,8 @@ static inline void kernel_unpoison_pages(struct page *page, int numpages) { } > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_MAYBE(CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON, init_on_alloc); > static inline bool want_init_on_alloc(gfp_t flags) > { > - if (static_branch_unlikely(&init_on_alloc)) > + if (static_branch_maybe(CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON, > + &init_on_alloc)) > return true; > return flags & __GFP_ZERO; > } > @@ -2882,7 +2883,8 @@ static inline bool want_init_on_alloc(gfp_t flags) > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_MAYBE(CONFIG_INIT_ON_FREE_DEFAULT_ON, init_on_free); > static inline bool want_init_on_free(void) > { > - return static_branch_unlikely(&init_on_free); > + return static_branch_maybe(CONFIG_INIT_ON_FREE_DEFAULT_ON, > + &init_on_free); > } > > extern bool _debug_pagealloc_enabled_early; Should we also update slab_want_init_on_alloc() and slab_want_init_on_free()? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B74E7C433E0 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:55:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from desiato.infradead.org (desiato.infradead.org [90.155.92.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 292A764F4D for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:55:54 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 292A764F4D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=desiato.20200630; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Cc:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From:In-Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=r5TedlAG4/3hYLZ+hQtwPnd0snhxYwluBA+DDHXzUoc=; b=Ns1eb7Q/ZzWxZw/u4XsJMehs6 3/BEwxU6taSaYnXj1ddLk4KTCGA71hHsHRXrVwznoLtlPXU1rK0ILwXjVD1wGKXvU6Va7eTiXSAfB K2NXlE1uGDq5GPsnjgwHjTGwCDyIT6naGcRQY6rnGFXAO0Mc+grg/29cGQrnVY3F6VJSsLbHWlgkb wNZdqA8atqpqGQ3YAfoLtlw2OFnaXSyZ4xRzQrup+FsdhSkjM6GNF8PA3FWESwb65a3bUNPIfnjQC 1laOEHVPcn6g5MbX24xKOOJNK7hdZAuizkwK6sRv1UyM98zgOeUWWncGEEnPSD8phu3MwBVg8FtHR leXGMasMw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=desiato.infradead.org) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lJyM3-006pfQ-Qu; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:54:24 +0000 Received: from mail-pf1-x435.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::435]) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lJyK2-006pac-Jt for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:54:20 +0000 Received: by mail-pf1-x435.google.com with SMTP id y67so12050859pfb.2 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/BK42rEfZDnxMm7tn7QJoRMRkMDyVR3i3bNbcPekdIg=; b=h3fEZUkobZr1jCHE1WazBNRG4q6cvgfOa2N+PfxLN8F7RZJkzgxy8/c570n7v1gsgE wSVCeFTC/83l9s7h3AlU7OrKC5RGtvsuxScUqY6IJhXjcghZQ8EL07clpakh4MTYsG7o 6KoC27yoGboGzxYaB+5W8my72cxKXJZYwPWTh6e8c4ZfV+hRQj3DRwvP3l72LQhNw298 sOkfAxTRzwbtQwEezjar0b8cKncz7NqR60/GEO5Od0xr52s3xXhE73SXrE4cXBPxJIlS lmmdDl8v0ikLdUjBpWCTlgfWxaqXztaooul2c927TtNy00/RKZdi/4PbDlNVnuRV13n1 rroQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/BK42rEfZDnxMm7tn7QJoRMRkMDyVR3i3bNbcPekdIg=; b=MGOEL6azSjv5cSmOIwq02Fe0q7BjYMbc4Zm+a8Veq3MU8D5RxdPjAYeS9UlLYPXWl9 LWU+JeKwZxaxxuRLFdlvwiimzMFB0xM5VV9TBqzxzEH1YADdkatwJ4bryojB14GH2tzT dLQGpuv1JwgOj8gwbptqc0k+p7bzsVijdMgXYadtNfhBbXDKdXFyQCRhieFhN5kpBMVU hYRzqxGecSLWUUAhgW6aHaJRjTgyY+cV6ZG0LfsdH1g9xx1xCNvO23ARzHNi0HFqzvT0 vKJmmBq8dSiL4u7BpZrxeyO5N5mM8mxUA3jkBhoKVycEVIBn7aS9o0vefouZ3gFuNYvh fHxg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Nw8RTg+MmPALtW3UKrUShVCgTTwwmnS2tIHM614fpqxyoYFHU IVprleW1GUnRve6+8vbpLb9M3jJNhekw39Tc1eZIiw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz6Al6cQ9o2Jkic0AM6aT+uI8HXaIO3FGRdEqDpDV6bZgYd+QRynVKdHFUIi1JAN2QCB/oYogOY84k0cBj6NyQ= X-Received: by 2002:a63:455d:: with SMTP id u29mr2647321pgk.286.1615380735994; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:52:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210309214301.678739-1-keescook@chromium.org> <20210309214301.678739-4-keescook@chromium.org> In-Reply-To: <20210309214301.678739-4-keescook@chromium.org> From: Andrey Konovalov Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:52:04 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/7] init_on_alloc: Unpessimize default-on builds To: Kees Cook , Alexander Potapenko Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Elena Reshetova , "the arch/x86 maintainers" , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , Alexander Popov , Ard Biesheuvel , Jann Horn , kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, Linux ARM , Linux Memory Management List , LKML , Vlastimil Babka , David Hildenbrand , Mike Rapoport , Andrew Morton , Jonathan Corbet , Randy Dunlap X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210310_125418_922427_910A6505 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 19.88 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 10:43 PM Kees Cook wrote: > > Right now, the state of CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON (and > ...ON_FREE...) did not change the assembly ordering of the static branch > tests. Use the new jump_label macro to check CONFIG settings to default > to the "expected" state, unpessimizes the resulting assembly code. > > Reviewed-by: Alexander Potapenko > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAG_fn=X0DVwqLaHJTO6Jw7TGcMSm77GKHinrd0m_6y0SzWOrFA@mail.gmail.com/ > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook > --- > include/linux/mm.h | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h > index bf341a9bfe46..2ccd856ac0d1 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mm.h > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h > @@ -2874,7 +2874,8 @@ static inline void kernel_unpoison_pages(struct page *page, int numpages) { } > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_MAYBE(CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON, init_on_alloc); > static inline bool want_init_on_alloc(gfp_t flags) > { > - if (static_branch_unlikely(&init_on_alloc)) > + if (static_branch_maybe(CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON, > + &init_on_alloc)) > return true; > return flags & __GFP_ZERO; > } > @@ -2882,7 +2883,8 @@ static inline bool want_init_on_alloc(gfp_t flags) > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_MAYBE(CONFIG_INIT_ON_FREE_DEFAULT_ON, init_on_free); > static inline bool want_init_on_free(void) > { > - return static_branch_unlikely(&init_on_free); > + return static_branch_maybe(CONFIG_INIT_ON_FREE_DEFAULT_ON, > + &init_on_free); > } > > extern bool _debug_pagealloc_enabled_early; Should we also update slab_want_init_on_alloc() and slab_want_init_on_free()? _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel