linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jisheng Zhang <Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kfence: allow providing __kfence_pool in arch specific way
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 09:27:49 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210525092749.3ceac5ad@xhacker.debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNOVikz=u90-xQKzWGxbH_ov5R_EkuG6ZLqVAkjkgw8Z2Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 24 May 2021 12:36:34 +0200
Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Mon, 24 May 2021 at 11:26, Jisheng Zhang <Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com> wrote:
> > Some architectures may want to allocate the __kfence_pool differently
> > for example, allocate the __kfence_pool earlier before paging_init().
> > We also delay the memset() to kfence_init_pool().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/kfence/core.c | 6 ++++--
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/kfence/core.c b/mm/kfence/core.c
> > index e18fbbd5d9b4..65f0210edb65 100644
> > --- a/mm/kfence/core.c
> > +++ b/mm/kfence/core.c
> > @@ -430,6 +430,8 @@ static bool __init kfence_init_pool(void)
> >         if (!__kfence_pool)
> >                 return false;
> >
> > +       memset(__kfence_pool, 0, KFENCE_POOL_SIZE);
> > +  
> 
> Use memzero_explicit().
> 
> Also, for the arm64 case, is delaying the zeroing relevant? You still
> call kfence_alloc_pool() in patch 2/2, and zeroing it on
> memblock_alloc() is not wrong, correct?

memblock_alloc() returns virtual address which can't be used before paging_init()
so I delayed the memset to kfence_init_pool.

> 
> Essentially if there's not going to be any benefit to us doing the
> zeroing ourselves, I'd simply leave it as-is and keep using
> memblock_alloc(). And if there's some odd architecture that doesn't
> even want to use kfence_alloc_pool(), they could just zero the memory
> themselves. But we really should use kfence_alloc_pool(), because
> otherwise it'll just become unmaintainable if on changes to
> kfence_alloc_pool() we have to go and find other special architectures
> that don't use it and adjust them, too.
> 
> Thanks,
> -- Marco
> 
> >         if (!arch_kfence_init_pool())
> >                 goto err;
> >
> > @@ -645,10 +647,10 @@ static DECLARE_DELAYED_WORK(kfence_timer, toggle_allocation_gate);
> >
> >  void __init kfence_alloc_pool(void)
> >  {
> > -       if (!kfence_sample_interval)
> > +       if (!kfence_sample_interval || __kfence_pool)
> >                 return;
> >
> > -       __kfence_pool = memblock_alloc(KFENCE_POOL_SIZE, PAGE_SIZE);
> > +       __kfence_pool = memblock_alloc_raw(KFENCE_POOL_SIZE, PAGE_SIZE);
> >
> >         if (!__kfence_pool)
> >                 pr_err("failed to allocate pool\n");
> > --
> > 2.31.0
> >  



  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-25  1:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-24  9:24 [PATCH 0/2] arm64: remove page granularity limitation from KFENCE Jisheng Zhang
2021-05-24  9:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] kfence: allow providing __kfence_pool in arch specific way Jisheng Zhang
2021-05-24 10:36   ` Marco Elver
2021-05-25  1:27     ` Jisheng Zhang [this message]
2021-05-24  9:26 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64: remove page granularity limitation from KFENCE Jisheng Zhang
2021-05-24 10:04   ` Marco Elver
2021-05-24 10:06     ` Jisheng Zhang
2021-05-24 18:04     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-05-25  2:15       ` Jisheng Zhang

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=20210525092749.3ceac5ad@xhacker.debian \
    --to=jisheng.zhang@synaptics.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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