From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Patrick Wang <patrick.wang.shcn@gmail.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yee.lee@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: kmemleak: check boundary of objects allocated with physical address when scan
Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 17:29:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YpZCWbfNE32EzCnz@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220531150823.1004101-1-patrick.wang.shcn@gmail.com>
On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 11:08:23PM +0800, Patrick Wang wrote:
> @@ -1132,8 +1135,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(kmemleak_no_scan);
> void __ref kmemleak_alloc_phys(phys_addr_t phys, size_t size, int min_count,
> gfp_t gfp)
> {
> - if (PHYS_PFN(phys) >= min_low_pfn && PHYS_PFN(phys) < max_low_pfn)
> - kmemleak_alloc(__va(phys), size, min_count, gfp);
> + pr_debug("%s(0x%p, %zu, %d)\n", __func__, __va(phys), size, min_count);
I'd print just phys here since that's the function argument.
> + if (kmemleak_enabled && (unsigned long)__va(phys) >= PAGE_OFFSET &&
> + !IS_ERR(__va(phys)))
> + /* create object with OBJECT_PHYS flag */
> + create_object((unsigned long)__va(phys), size, min_count,
> + gfp, true);
Do we still need to check for __va(phys) >= PAGE_OFFSET? Also I don't
think IS_ERR(__va(phys)) makes sense, we can't store an error in a
physical address. The kmemleak_alloc_phys() function is only called on
successful allocation, so shouldn't bother with error codes.
> @@ -1436,6 +1441,13 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
> dump_object_info(object);
> }
> #endif
> +
> + /* outside lowmem, make it black */
Maybe a bit more verbose:
/* ignore objects outside lowmem (paint them black) */
> + if (object->flags & OBJECT_PHYS)
> + if (PHYS_PFN(__pa((void *)object->pointer)) < min_low_pfn ||
> + PHYS_PFN(__pa((void *)object->pointer)) >= max_low_pfn)
> + __paint_it(object, KMEMLEAK_BLACK);
I'd skip the checks if the object is OBJECT_NO_SCAN (side-effect of
__paint_it()) so that the next scan won't have to go through the __pa()
checks again. It's also probably more correct to check the upper object
boundary). Something like:
if ((object->flags & OBJECT_PHYS) &&
!(object->flags & OBJECT_NO_SCAN)) {
unsigned long phys = __pa((void *)object->pointer);
if (PHYS_PFN(phys) < min_low_pfn ||
PHYS_PFN(phys + object->size) >= max_low_pfn)
__paint_it(object, KMEMLEAK_BLACK);
}
Thanks.
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-31 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-31 15:08 [PATCH] mm: kmemleak: check boundary of objects allocated with physical address when scan Patrick Wang
2022-05-31 16:29 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2022-06-01 10:24 ` Patrick Wang
2022-06-01 16:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-06-02 10:22 ` patrick wang
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=YpZCWbfNE32EzCnz@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=patrick.wang.shcn@gmail.com \
--cc=yee.lee@mediatek.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).