From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
Cc: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] kasan: use separate (un)poison implementation for integrated init
Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 12:12:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YK4fBogA/rzxEF1f@elver.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <78af73393175c648b4eb10312825612f6e6889f6.1620849613.git.pcc@google.com>
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 01:09PM -0700, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
[...]
> +void kasan_alloc_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order, gfp_t flags);
> +void kasan_free_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order);
> +
> #else /* CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS */
>
> static inline bool kasan_enabled(void)
> {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KASAN
> return true;
> +#else
> + return false;
> +#endif
> }
Just
return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN);
> static inline bool kasan_has_integrated_init(void)
> @@ -113,8 +113,30 @@ static inline bool kasan_has_integrated_init(void)
> return false;
> }
>
> +static __always_inline void kasan_alloc_pages(struct page *page,
> + unsigned int order, gfp_t flags)
> +{
> + /* Only available for integrated init. */
> + BUILD_BUG();
> +}
> +
> +static __always_inline void kasan_free_pages(struct page *page,
> + unsigned int order)
> +{
> + /* Only available for integrated init. */
> + BUILD_BUG();
> +}
This *should* always work, as long as the compiler optimizes everything
like we expect.
But: In this case, I think this is sign that the interface design can be
improved. Can we just make kasan_{alloc,free}_pages() return a 'bool
__must_check' to indicate if kasan takes care of init?
The variants here would simply return kasan_has_integrated_init().
That way, there'd be no need for the BUILD_BUG()s and the interface
becomes harder to misuse by design.
Also, given that kasan_{alloc,free}_pages() initializes memory, this is
an opportunity to just give them a better name. Perhaps
/* Returns true if KASAN took care of initialization, false otherwise. */
bool __must_check kasan_alloc_pages_try_init(struct page *page, unsigned int order, gfp_t flags);
bool __must_check kasan_free_pages_try_init(struct page *page, unsigned int order);
[...]
> - init = want_init_on_free();
> - if (init && !kasan_has_integrated_init())
> - kernel_init_free_pages(page, 1 << order);
> - kasan_free_nondeferred_pages(page, order, init, fpi_flags);
> + if (kasan_has_integrated_init()) {
> + if (!skip_kasan_poison)
> + kasan_free_pages(page, order);
I think kasan_free_pages() could return a bool, and this would become
if (skip_kasan_poison || !kasan_free_pages(...)) {
...
> + } else {
> + bool init = want_init_on_free();
> +
> + if (init)
> + kernel_init_free_pages(page, 1 << order);
> + if (!skip_kasan_poison)
> + kasan_poison_pages(page, order, init);
> + }
>
> /*
> * arch_free_page() can make the page's contents inaccessible. s390
> @@ -2324,8 +2324,6 @@ static bool check_new_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
> inline void post_alloc_hook(struct page *page, unsigned int order,
> gfp_t gfp_flags)
> {
> - bool init;
> -
> set_page_private(page, 0);
> set_page_refcounted(page);
>
> @@ -2344,10 +2342,16 @@ inline void post_alloc_hook(struct page *page, unsigned int order,
> * kasan_alloc_pages and kernel_init_free_pages must be
> * kept together to avoid discrepancies in behavior.
> */
> - init = !want_init_on_free() && want_init_on_alloc(gfp_flags);
> - kasan_alloc_pages(page, order, init);
> - if (init && !kasan_has_integrated_init())
> - kernel_init_free_pages(page, 1 << order);
> + if (kasan_has_integrated_init()) {
> + kasan_alloc_pages(page, order, gfp_flags);
It looks to me that kasan_alloc_pages() could return a bool, and this
would become
if (!kasan_alloc_pages(...)) {
...
> + } else {
> + bool init =
> + !want_init_on_free() && want_init_on_alloc(gfp_flags);
> +
[ No need for line-break (for cases like this the kernel is fine with up
to 100 cols if it improves readability). ]
> + kasan_unpoison_pages(page, order, init);
> + if (init)
> + kernel_init_free_pages(page, 1 << order);
> + }
Thoughts?
Thanks,
-- Marco
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-26 10:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-12 20:09 [PATCH v3 0/3] arm64: improve efficiency of setting tags for user pages Peter Collingbourne
2021-05-12 20:09 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] kasan: use separate (un)poison implementation for integrated init Peter Collingbourne
2021-05-25 22:00 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-05-28 1:04 ` Peter Collingbourne
2021-05-26 10:12 ` Marco Elver [this message]
2021-05-26 19:27 ` Peter Collingbourne
2021-05-26 19:54 ` Marco Elver
2021-05-12 20:09 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] arm64: mte: handle tags zeroing at page allocation time Peter Collingbourne
2021-05-25 22:00 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-05-12 20:09 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] kasan: allow freed user page poisoning to be disabled with HW tags Peter Collingbourne
2021-05-25 22:06 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-05-26 10:45 ` Jann Horn
2021-05-28 1:05 ` Peter Collingbourne
2021-05-25 19:03 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] arm64: improve efficiency of setting tags for user pages Peter Collingbourne
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=YK4fBogA/rzxEF1f@elver.google.com \
--to=elver@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreyknvl@gmail.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=eugenis@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=pcc@google.com \
--cc=vincenzo.frascino@arm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).