linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, cl@linux.com, keescook@chromium.org,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Sandeep Patil <sspatil@android.com>,
	Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] gfp: mm: introduce __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 14:59:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190517125916.GF1825@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190514143537.10435-4-glider@google.com>

[It would be great to keep people involved in the previous version in the
CC list]

On Tue 14-05-19 16:35:36, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> When passed to an allocator (either pagealloc or SL[AOU]B),
> __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT tells it to not initialize the requested memory if the
> init_on_alloc boot option is enabled. This can be useful in the cases
> newly allocated memory is going to be initialized by the caller right
> away.
> 
> __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT doesn't affect init_on_free behavior, except for SLOB,
> where init_on_free implies init_on_alloc.
> 
> __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT basically defeats the hardening against information
> leaks provided by init_on_alloc, so one should use it with caution.
> 
> This patch also adds __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT to alloc_pages() calls in SL[AOU]B.
> Doing so is safe, because the heap allocators initialize the pages they
> receive before passing memory to the callers.

I still do not like the idea of a new gfp flag as explained in the
previous email. People will simply use it incorectly or arbitrarily.
We have that juicy experience from the past.

Freeing a memory is an opt-in feature and the slab allocator can already
tell many (with constructor or GFP_ZERO) do not need it.

So can we go without this gfp thing and see whether somebody actually
finds a performance problem with the feature enabled and think about
what can we do about it rather than add this maint. nightmare from the
very beginning?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-17 12:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20190514143537.10435-1-glider@google.com>
2019-05-14 14:35 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] mm: security: introduce init_on_alloc=1 and init_on_free=1 boot options Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-16 16:19   ` Kees Cook
2019-05-16 16:42     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-16 17:03       ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17  1:26   ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17 14:38     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 14:04   ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-17 14:11     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 14:20       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-17 16:36         ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17 17:11           ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-14 14:35 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] lib: introduce test_meminit module Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-16  1:02   ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17 15:51     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 16:37       ` Kees Cook
2019-05-14 14:35 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] gfp: mm: introduce __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 12:59   ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-05-17 13:18     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 13:25       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-17 13:37         ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 14:01           ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-17 16:27             ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17 17:11               ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-21 14:18                 ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-21 14:25                   ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-14 14:35 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] net: apply __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT to AF_UNIX sk_buff allocations Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-16 16:53   ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17  0:26     ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17  8:49       ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 13:50         ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 16:13         ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17  0:50   ` [PATCH 5/4] mm: Introduce SLAB_NO_FREE_INIT and mark excluded caches Kees Cook
2019-05-17  8:34     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 15:59       ` Kees Cook
2019-05-20  6:10     ` Mathias Krause
2019-05-20 16:12       ` Kees Cook

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=20190517125916.GF1825@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=jrdr.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=kcc@google.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=sspatil@android.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.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