All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>, Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
	David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
	Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
	Christian K??nig <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
	Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
	Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@amd.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-media@vger.kernel.org" <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
	"dev@openvswitch.org" <dev@openvswitch.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"llvm@lists.linux.dev" <llvm@lists.linux.dev>,
	"linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] slab: Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup()
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:17:25 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yy0JJV4c3DffCF+4@feng-clx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YyxDFfKmSNNkHBFi@hyeyoo>

Thanks Hyeonggon for looping in me.

On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 07:12:21PM +0800, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 08:10:02PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > In the effort to help the compiler reason about buffer sizes, the
> > __alloc_size attribute was added to allocators. This improves the scope
> > of the compiler's ability to apply CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS and (in the near
> > future) CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE. For most allocations, this works well,
> > as the vast majority of callers are not expecting to use more memory
> > than what they asked for.
> > 
> > There is, however, one common exception to this: anticipatory resizing
> > of kmalloc allocations. These cases all use ksize() to determine the
> > actual bucket size of a given allocation (e.g. 128 when 126 was asked
> > for). This comes in two styles in the kernel:
> > 
> > 1) An allocation has been determined to be too small, and needs to be
> >    resized. Instead of the caller choosing its own next best size, it
> >    wants to minimize the number of calls to krealloc(), so it just uses
> >    ksize() plus some additional bytes, forcing the realloc into the next
> >    bucket size, from which it can learn how large it is now. For example:
> > 
> > 	data = krealloc(data, ksize(data) + 1, gfp);
> > 	data_len = ksize(data);
> > 
> > 2) The minimum size of an allocation is calculated, but since it may
> >    grow in the future, just use all the space available in the chosen
> >    bucket immediately, to avoid needing to reallocate later. A good
> >    example of this is skbuff's allocators:
> > 
> > 	data = kmalloc_reserve(size, gfp_mask, node, &pfmemalloc);
> > 	...
> > 	/* kmalloc(size) might give us more room than requested.
> > 	 * Put skb_shared_info exactly at the end of allocated zone,
> > 	 * to allow max possible filling before reallocation.
> > 	 */
> > 	osize = ksize(data);
> >         size = SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(osize);
> > 
> > In both cases, the "how large is the allocation?" question is answered
> > _after_ the allocation, where the compiler hinting is not in an easy place
> > to make the association any more. This mismatch between the compiler's
> > view of the buffer length and the code's intention about how much it is
> > going to actually use has already caused problems[1]. It is possible to
> > fix this by reordering the use of the "actual size" information.
> > 
> > We can serve the needs of users of ksize() and still have accurate buffer
> > length hinting for the compiler by doing the bucket size calculation
> > _before_ the allocation. Code can instead ask "how large an allocation
> > would I get for a given size?".
> > 
> > Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup(), to serve this function so we can start
> > replacing the "anticipatory resizing" uses of ksize().
> >
> 
> Cc-ing Feng Tang who may welcome this series ;)
 
Indeed! This will help our work of extending slub redzone check,
as we also ran into some trouble with ksize() users when extending
the redzone support to this extra allocated space than requested
size [1], and have to disable the redzone sanity for all ksize()
users [2].

[1]. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220719134503.GA56558@shbuild999.sh.intel.com/
[2]. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220913065423.520159-5-feng.tang@intel.com/

Thanks,
Feng

> > [1] https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/1599
> >     https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/183
> > 
> > Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> > Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
> > Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> > Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> > ---

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@amd.com>,
	"llvm@lists.linux.dev" <llvm@lists.linux.dev>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	"linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>,
	Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
	"dev@openvswitch.org" <dev@openvswitch.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
	"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"linux-media@vger.kernel.org" <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	Christian K??nig <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] slab: Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup()
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:17:25 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yy0JJV4c3DffCF+4@feng-clx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YyxDFfKmSNNkHBFi@hyeyoo>

Thanks Hyeonggon for looping in me.

On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 07:12:21PM +0800, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 08:10:02PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > In the effort to help the compiler reason about buffer sizes, the
> > __alloc_size attribute was added to allocators. This improves the scope
> > of the compiler's ability to apply CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS and (in the near
> > future) CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE. For most allocations, this works well,
> > as the vast majority of callers are not expecting to use more memory
> > than what they asked for.
> > 
> > There is, however, one common exception to this: anticipatory resizing
> > of kmalloc allocations. These cases all use ksize() to determine the
> > actual bucket size of a given allocation (e.g. 128 when 126 was asked
> > for). This comes in two styles in the kernel:
> > 
> > 1) An allocation has been determined to be too small, and needs to be
> >    resized. Instead of the caller choosing its own next best size, it
> >    wants to minimize the number of calls to krealloc(), so it just uses
> >    ksize() plus some additional bytes, forcing the realloc into the next
> >    bucket size, from which it can learn how large it is now. For example:
> > 
> > 	data = krealloc(data, ksize(data) + 1, gfp);
> > 	data_len = ksize(data);
> > 
> > 2) The minimum size of an allocation is calculated, but since it may
> >    grow in the future, just use all the space available in the chosen
> >    bucket immediately, to avoid needing to reallocate later. A good
> >    example of this is skbuff's allocators:
> > 
> > 	data = kmalloc_reserve(size, gfp_mask, node, &pfmemalloc);
> > 	...
> > 	/* kmalloc(size) might give us more room than requested.
> > 	 * Put skb_shared_info exactly at the end of allocated zone,
> > 	 * to allow max possible filling before reallocation.
> > 	 */
> > 	osize = ksize(data);
> >         size = SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(osize);
> > 
> > In both cases, the "how large is the allocation?" question is answered
> > _after_ the allocation, where the compiler hinting is not in an easy place
> > to make the association any more. This mismatch between the compiler's
> > view of the buffer length and the code's intention about how much it is
> > going to actually use has already caused problems[1]. It is possible to
> > fix this by reordering the use of the "actual size" information.
> > 
> > We can serve the needs of users of ksize() and still have accurate buffer
> > length hinting for the compiler by doing the bucket size calculation
> > _before_ the allocation. Code can instead ask "how large an allocation
> > would I get for a given size?".
> > 
> > Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup(), to serve this function so we can start
> > replacing the "anticipatory resizing" uses of ksize().
> >
> 
> Cc-ing Feng Tang who may welcome this series ;)
 
Indeed! This will help our work of extending slub redzone check,
as we also ran into some trouble with ksize() users when extending
the redzone support to this extra allocated space than requested
size [1], and have to disable the redzone sanity for all ksize()
users [2].

[1]. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220719134503.GA56558@shbuild999.sh.intel.com/
[2]. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220913065423.520159-5-feng.tang@intel.com/

Thanks,
Feng

> > [1] https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/1599
> >     https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/183
> > 
> > Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> > Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
> > Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> > Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> > ---

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@amd.com>,
	"llvm@lists.linux.dev" <llvm@lists.linux.dev>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	"linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>,
	Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
	"dev@openvswitch.org" <dev@openvswitch.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"linux-media@vger.kernel.org" <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Christian K??nig <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 01/12] slab: Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup()
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 09:17:25 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yy0JJV4c3DffCF+4@feng-clx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YyxDFfKmSNNkHBFi@hyeyoo>

Thanks Hyeonggon for looping in me.

On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 07:12:21PM +0800, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 08:10:02PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > In the effort to help the compiler reason about buffer sizes, the
> > __alloc_size attribute was added to allocators. This improves the scope
> > of the compiler's ability to apply CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS and (in the near
> > future) CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE. For most allocations, this works well,
> > as the vast majority of callers are not expecting to use more memory
> > than what they asked for.
> > 
> > There is, however, one common exception to this: anticipatory resizing
> > of kmalloc allocations. These cases all use ksize() to determine the
> > actual bucket size of a given allocation (e.g. 128 when 126 was asked
> > for). This comes in two styles in the kernel:
> > 
> > 1) An allocation has been determined to be too small, and needs to be
> >    resized. Instead of the caller choosing its own next best size, it
> >    wants to minimize the number of calls to krealloc(), so it just uses
> >    ksize() plus some additional bytes, forcing the realloc into the next
> >    bucket size, from which it can learn how large it is now. For example:
> > 
> > 	data = krealloc(data, ksize(data) + 1, gfp);
> > 	data_len = ksize(data);
> > 
> > 2) The minimum size of an allocation is calculated, but since it may
> >    grow in the future, just use all the space available in the chosen
> >    bucket immediately, to avoid needing to reallocate later. A good
> >    example of this is skbuff's allocators:
> > 
> > 	data = kmalloc_reserve(size, gfp_mask, node, &pfmemalloc);
> > 	...
> > 	/* kmalloc(size) might give us more room than requested.
> > 	 * Put skb_shared_info exactly at the end of allocated zone,
> > 	 * to allow max possible filling before reallocation.
> > 	 */
> > 	osize = ksize(data);
> >         size = SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(osize);
> > 
> > In both cases, the "how large is the allocation?" question is answered
> > _after_ the allocation, where the compiler hinting is not in an easy place
> > to make the association any more. This mismatch between the compiler's
> > view of the buffer length and the code's intention about how much it is
> > going to actually use has already caused problems[1]. It is possible to
> > fix this by reordering the use of the "actual size" information.
> > 
> > We can serve the needs of users of ksize() and still have accurate buffer
> > length hinting for the compiler by doing the bucket size calculation
> > _before_ the allocation. Code can instead ask "how large an allocation
> > would I get for a given size?".
> > 
> > Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup(), to serve this function so we can start
> > replacing the "anticipatory resizing" uses of ksize().
> >
> 
> Cc-ing Feng Tang who may welcome this series ;)
 
Indeed! This will help our work of extending slub redzone check,
as we also ran into some trouble with ksize() users when extending
the redzone support to this extra allocated space than requested
size [1], and have to disable the redzone sanity for all ksize()
users [2].

[1]. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220719134503.GA56558@shbuild999.sh.intel.com/
[2]. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220913065423.520159-5-feng.tang@intel.com/

Thanks,
Feng

> > [1] https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/1599
> >     https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/183
> > 
> > Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> > Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
> > Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> > Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> > ---
_______________________________________________
Intel-wired-lan mailing list
Intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan

  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-23  1:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 96+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-22  3:10 [PATCH 00/12] slab: Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup() Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 01/12] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 11:12   ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-09-22 11:12     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-09-22 11:12     ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-09-23  1:17     ` Feng Tang [this message]
2022-09-23  1:17       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Feng Tang
2022-09-23  1:17       ` Feng Tang
2022-09-23 18:50       ` Kees Cook
2022-09-23 18:50         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-23 18:50         ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 02/12] skbuff: Proactively round up to kmalloc bucket size Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 19:40   ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-09-22 19:40     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2022-09-22 19:40     ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 03/12] net: ipa: " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 13:45   ` Alex Elder
2022-09-22 13:45     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alex Elder
2022-09-22 13:45     ` Alex Elder
2022-09-22 15:57     ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 15:57       ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 15:57       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 04/12] btrfs: send: " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 13:30   ` David Sterba
2022-09-22 13:30     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " David Sterba
2022-09-22 13:30     ` David Sterba
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 05/12] dma-buf: " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 06/12] coredump: " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 07/12] igb: " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 15:56   ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-09-22 15:56     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Ruhl, Michael J
2022-09-22 15:56     ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-09-22 16:00     ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 16:00       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22 16:00       ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 08/12] openvswitch: " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 09/12] x86/microcode/AMD: Track patch allocation size explicitly Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 10/12] iwlwifi: Track scan_cmd " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  4:18   ` Kalle Valo
2022-09-22  4:18     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kalle Valo
2022-09-22  4:18     ` Kalle Valo
2022-09-22  5:26     ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  5:26       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  5:26       ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 11/12] slab: Remove __malloc attribute from realloc functions Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  9:23   ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-09-22  9:23     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Miguel Ojeda
2022-09-22  9:23     ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-09-22 15:56     ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 15:56       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22 15:56       ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 17:41       ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-09-22 17:41         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Miguel Ojeda
2022-09-22 17:41         ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-09-22  3:10 ` [PATCH 12/12] slab: Restore __alloc_size attribute to __kmalloc_track_caller Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22  3:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22  7:10 ` [PATCH 00/12] slab: Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup() Christian König
2022-09-22  7:10   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Christian König
2022-09-22  7:10   ` Christian König
2022-09-22 15:55   ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 15:55     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22 15:55     ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 21:05     ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-22 21:05       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-22 21:05       ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-22 21:49       ` Kees Cook
2022-09-22 21:49         ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Kees Cook
2022-09-22 21:49         ` Kees Cook
2022-09-23  9:07         ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-23  9:07           ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Vlastimil Babka
2022-09-23  9:07           ` Vlastimil Babka

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Yy0JJV4c3DffCF+4@feng-clx \
    --to=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=danielmicay@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dev@openvswitch.org \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=elder@kernel.org \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=jacob.shin@amd.com \
    --cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
    --cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.