Re: [PATCH v4 03/11] arm64, kfence: enable KFENCE for ARM64

[Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:38 PM Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
> Add architecture specific implementation details for KFENCE and enable
> KFENCE for the arm64 architecture. In particular, this implements the
> required interface in <asm/kfence.h>. Currently, the arm64 version does
> not yet use a statically allocated memory pool, at the cost of a pointer
> load for each is_kfence_address().
[...]
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kfence.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kfence.h
[...]
> +static inline bool arch_kfence_initialize_pool(void)
> +{
> +       const unsigned int num_pages = ilog2(roundup_pow_of_two(KFENCE_POOL_SIZE / PAGE_SIZE));
> +       struct page *pages = alloc_pages(GFP_KERNEL, num_pages);
> +
> +       if (!pages)
> +               return false;
> +
> +       __kfence_pool = page_address(pages);
> +       return true;
> +}

If you're going to do "virt_to_page(meta->addr)->slab_cache = cache;"
on these pages in kfence_guarded_alloc(), and pass them into kfree(),
you'd better mark these pages as non-compound - something like
alloc_pages_exact() or split_page() may help. Otherwise, I think when
SLUB's kfree() does virt_to_head_page() right at the start, that will
return a pointer to the first page of the entire __kfence_pool, and
then when it loads page->slab_cache, it gets some random cache and
stuff blows up. Kinda surprising that you haven't run into that during
your testing, maybe I'm missing something...

Also, this kinda feels like it should be the "generic" version of
arch_kfence_initialize_pool() and live in mm/kfence/core.c ?