linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH 1/1] alloc_tag: work around clang-14 issue with __builtin_object_size()
@ 2025-02-01 20:05 Suren Baghdasaryan
  2025-02-05 19:18 ` Kees Cook
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Suren Baghdasaryan @ 2025-02-01 20:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: akpm
  Cc: kent.overstreet, nathan, ndesaulniers, keescook, morbo,
	justinstitt, surenb, linux-mm, linux-kernel, llvm,
	kernel test robot

Additional condition in the allocation hooks causes Clang version 14
(tested on 14.0.6) to treat the allocated object size as unknown at
compile-time (__builtin_object_size(obj, 1) returns -1) even though
both branches of that condition yield the same result. Other versions
of Clang (tested with 13.0.1, 15.0.7, 16.0.6 and 17.0.6) compile the
same code without issues. Add build-time Clang version check which
removes this condition and effectively restores the unconditional tag
store/restore flow when compiled with clang-14.

Fixes: 07438779313c ("alloc_tag: avoid current->alloc_tag manipulations when profiling is disabled")
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202501310832.kiAeOt2z-lkp@intel.com/
Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
---
 include/linux/alloc_tag.h | 15 ++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/alloc_tag.h b/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
index a946e0203e6d..df432c2c3483 100644
--- a/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
+++ b/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
@@ -222,10 +222,23 @@ static inline void alloc_tag_sub(union codetag_ref *ref, size_t bytes) {}
 
 #endif /* CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING */
 
+/* See https://lore.kernel.org/all/202501310832.kiAeOt2z-lkp@intel.com/ */
+#if defined(CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG) && CONFIG_CLANG_VERSION >= 140000 && CONFIG_CLANG_VERSION < 150000
+static inline bool store_current_tag(void)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+#else
+static inline bool store_current_tag(void)
+{
+	return mem_alloc_profiling_enabled();
+}
+#endif
+
 #define alloc_hooks_tag(_tag, _do_alloc)				\
 ({									\
 	typeof(_do_alloc) _res;						\
-	if (mem_alloc_profiling_enabled()) {				\
+	if (store_current_tag()) {					\
 		struct alloc_tag * __maybe_unused _old;			\
 		_old = alloc_tag_save(_tag);				\
 		_res = _do_alloc;					\

base-commit: 60c828cf80c07394762a1edfaff63bea55cc8e45
-- 
2.48.1.362.g079036d154-goog



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/1] alloc_tag: work around clang-14 issue with __builtin_object_size()
  2025-02-01 20:05 [PATCH 1/1] alloc_tag: work around clang-14 issue with __builtin_object_size() Suren Baghdasaryan
@ 2025-02-05 19:18 ` Kees Cook
  2025-02-05 19:57   ` Nathan Chancellor
  2025-02-05 20:16   ` Kent Overstreet
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2025-02-05 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Suren Baghdasaryan
  Cc: akpm, kent.overstreet, nathan, ndesaulniers, morbo, justinstitt,
	linux-mm, linux-kernel, llvm, kernel test robot

On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 12:05:03PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> Additional condition in the allocation hooks causes Clang version 14
> (tested on 14.0.6) to treat the allocated object size as unknown at
> compile-time (__builtin_object_size(obj, 1) returns -1) even though
> both branches of that condition yield the same result. Other versions
> of Clang (tested with 13.0.1, 15.0.7, 16.0.6 and 17.0.6) compile the
> same code without issues. Add build-time Clang version check which
> removes this condition and effectively restores the unconditional tag
> store/restore flow when compiled with clang-14.
> 
> Fixes: 07438779313c ("alloc_tag: avoid current->alloc_tag manipulations when profiling is disabled")
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202501310832.kiAeOt2z-lkp@intel.com/
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/alloc_tag.h | 15 ++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/alloc_tag.h b/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
> index a946e0203e6d..df432c2c3483 100644
> --- a/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
> +++ b/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
> @@ -222,10 +222,23 @@ static inline void alloc_tag_sub(union codetag_ref *ref, size_t bytes) {}
>  
>  #endif /* CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING */
>  
> +/* See https://lore.kernel.org/all/202501310832.kiAeOt2z-lkp@intel.com/ */
> +#if defined(CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG) && CONFIG_CLANG_VERSION >= 140000 && CONFIG_CLANG_VERSION < 150000

FWIW, this could just be "< 150000" -- < 14 doesn't warn because (as
Nathan mentioned to me today) it didn't support the build-time error
attribute, so it wouldn't have warned even if it did trip over it.

> +static inline bool store_current_tag(void)
> +{
> +	return true;
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline bool store_current_tag(void)
> +{
> +	return mem_alloc_profiling_enabled();
> +}
> +#endif
> +
>  #define alloc_hooks_tag(_tag, _do_alloc)				\
>  ({									\
>  	typeof(_do_alloc) _res;						\
> -	if (mem_alloc_profiling_enabled()) {				\
> +	if (store_current_tag()) {					\
>  		struct alloc_tag * __maybe_unused _old;			\
>  		_old = alloc_tag_save(_tag);				\
>  		_res = _do_alloc;					\

I think the work-around is fine, but I'm trying to dig into the root
cause here.

As you found, it fails on the final strtomem_pad:

	strtomem_pad(key->u.kbd.press_str, press, '\0');
	strtomem_pad(key->u.kbd.repeat_str, repeat, '\0');
	strtomem_pad(key->u.kbd.release_str, release, '\0');

(but not the earlier calls??) The destinations are:

		char press_str[sizeof(void *) + sizeof(int)] __nonstring;
		char repeat_str[sizeof(void *) + sizeof(int)] __nonstring;
		char release_str[sizeof(void *) + sizeof(int)] __nonstring;

Random thoughts include "this is the last array in the struct" which might
imply bad compiler behavior about its sizing via __builtin_object_size()
(i.e. trailing array must always be unknown size to deal with
fake flex arrays), but that wasn't fixed until Clang 16 (with
-fstrict-flex-arrays=3), so that it doesn't trip in Clang 15 is odd.

To Kent's comment[1], I believe I was using __builtin_object_size() here
because I have a knee-jerk aversion to sizeof() due to it blowing up on
flexible arrays, but that's not relevant here. ARRAY_SIZE() would work,
but only if type checking to "char *" succeeds, as Kent suggests.

Let me see if making those changes survives testing...

-Kees

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/qbmazoiryyqygjk2x6bc7puqvmik7gyitzo3xnryzsodnrrjek@tahia33lvpli/

> 
> base-commit: 60c828cf80c07394762a1edfaff63bea55cc8e45
> -- 
> 2.48.1.362.g079036d154-goog
> 

-- 
Kees Cook


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/1] alloc_tag: work around clang-14 issue with __builtin_object_size()
  2025-02-05 19:18 ` Kees Cook
@ 2025-02-05 19:57   ` Nathan Chancellor
  2025-02-05 20:16   ` Kent Overstreet
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Nathan Chancellor @ 2025-02-05 19:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kees Cook
  Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan, akpm, kent.overstreet, ndesaulniers, morbo,
	justinstitt, linux-mm, linux-kernel, llvm, kernel test robot

On Wed, Feb 05, 2025 at 11:18:35AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 12:05:03PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > Additional condition in the allocation hooks causes Clang version 14
> > (tested on 14.0.6) to treat the allocated object size as unknown at
> > compile-time (__builtin_object_size(obj, 1) returns -1) even though
> > both branches of that condition yield the same result. Other versions
> > of Clang (tested with 13.0.1, 15.0.7, 16.0.6 and 17.0.6) compile the
> > same code without issues. Add build-time Clang version check which
> > removes this condition and effectively restores the unconditional tag
> > store/restore flow when compiled with clang-14.
> > 
> > Fixes: 07438779313c ("alloc_tag: avoid current->alloc_tag manipulations when profiling is disabled")
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202501310832.kiAeOt2z-lkp@intel.com/
> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/alloc_tag.h | 15 ++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/alloc_tag.h b/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
> > index a946e0203e6d..df432c2c3483 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
> > @@ -222,10 +222,23 @@ static inline void alloc_tag_sub(union codetag_ref *ref, size_t bytes) {}
> >  
> >  #endif /* CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING */
> >  
> > +/* See https://lore.kernel.org/all/202501310832.kiAeOt2z-lkp@intel.com/ */
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG) && CONFIG_CLANG_VERSION >= 140000 && CONFIG_CLANG_VERSION < 150000
> 
> FWIW, this could just be "< 150000" -- < 14 doesn't warn because (as
> Nathan mentioned to me today) it didn't support the build-time error
> attribute, so it wouldn't have warned even if it did trip over it.
> 
> > +static inline bool store_current_tag(void)
> > +{
> > +	return true;
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +static inline bool store_current_tag(void)
> > +{
> > +	return mem_alloc_profiling_enabled();
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> >  #define alloc_hooks_tag(_tag, _do_alloc)				\
> >  ({									\
> >  	typeof(_do_alloc) _res;						\
> > -	if (mem_alloc_profiling_enabled()) {				\
> > +	if (store_current_tag()) {					\
> >  		struct alloc_tag * __maybe_unused _old;			\
> >  		_old = alloc_tag_save(_tag);				\
> >  		_res = _do_alloc;					\
> 
> I think the work-around is fine, but I'm trying to dig into the root
> cause here.
> 
> As you found, it fails on the final strtomem_pad:
> 
> 	strtomem_pad(key->u.kbd.press_str, press, '\0');
> 	strtomem_pad(key->u.kbd.repeat_str, repeat, '\0');
> 	strtomem_pad(key->u.kbd.release_str, release, '\0');
> 
> (but not the earlier calls??) The destinations are:
> 
> 		char press_str[sizeof(void *) + sizeof(int)] __nonstring;
> 		char repeat_str[sizeof(void *) + sizeof(int)] __nonstring;
> 		char release_str[sizeof(void *) + sizeof(int)] __nonstring;
> 
> Random thoughts include "this is the last array in the struct" which might
> imply bad compiler behavior about its sizing via __builtin_object_size()
> (i.e. trailing array must always be unknown size to deal with
> fake flex arrays), but that wasn't fixed until Clang 16 (with
> -fstrict-flex-arrays=3), so that it doesn't trip in Clang 15 is odd.

I bisected the fix in LLVM 15 to
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d8e0a6d5e9dd2311641f9a8a5d2bf90829951ddc,
which certainly makes sense. Given the commit mentions phi nodes and
folding means that maybe there is a branch that was not getting
eliminated before this change? I have not really looked into the call
chain here.

> To Kent's comment[1], I believe I was using __builtin_object_size() here
> because I have a knee-jerk aversion to sizeof() due to it blowing up on
> flexible arrays, but that's not relevant here. ARRAY_SIZE() would work,
> but only if type checking to "char *" succeeds, as Kent suggests.
> 
> Let me see if making those changes survives testing...

If that suggestion works, I would certainly prefer that to a compiler
version workaround. Worst case, we could bump the minimum supported LLVM
version over this but it does not seem serious enough to do so at the
moment.

Cheers,
Nathan


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/1] alloc_tag: work around clang-14 issue with __builtin_object_size()
  2025-02-05 19:18 ` Kees Cook
  2025-02-05 19:57   ` Nathan Chancellor
@ 2025-02-05 20:16   ` Kent Overstreet
  2025-02-05 21:28     ` Kees Cook
  2025-02-06 18:13     ` Kees Cook
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kent Overstreet @ 2025-02-05 20:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kees Cook
  Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan, akpm, nathan, ndesaulniers, morbo,
	justinstitt, linux-mm, linux-kernel, llvm, kernel test robot

On Wed, Feb 05, 2025 at 11:18:35AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 12:05:03PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > Additional condition in the allocation hooks causes Clang version 14
> > (tested on 14.0.6) to treat the allocated object size as unknown at
> > compile-time (__builtin_object_size(obj, 1) returns -1) even though
> > both branches of that condition yield the same result. Other versions
> > of Clang (tested with 13.0.1, 15.0.7, 16.0.6 and 17.0.6) compile the
> > same code without issues. Add build-time Clang version check which
> > removes this condition and effectively restores the unconditional tag
> > store/restore flow when compiled with clang-14.
> > 
> > Fixes: 07438779313c ("alloc_tag: avoid current->alloc_tag manipulations when profiling is disabled")
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202501310832.kiAeOt2z-lkp@intel.com/
> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/alloc_tag.h | 15 ++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/alloc_tag.h b/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
> > index a946e0203e6d..df432c2c3483 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/alloc_tag.h
> > @@ -222,10 +222,23 @@ static inline void alloc_tag_sub(union codetag_ref *ref, size_t bytes) {}
> >  
> >  #endif /* CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING */
> >  
> > +/* See https://lore.kernel.org/all/202501310832.kiAeOt2z-lkp@intel.com/ */
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG) && CONFIG_CLANG_VERSION >= 140000 && CONFIG_CLANG_VERSION < 150000
> 
> FWIW, this could just be "< 150000" -- < 14 doesn't warn because (as
> Nathan mentioned to me today) it didn't support the build-time error
> attribute, so it wouldn't have warned even if it did trip over it.
> 
> > +static inline bool store_current_tag(void)
> > +{
> > +	return true;
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +static inline bool store_current_tag(void)
> > +{
> > +	return mem_alloc_profiling_enabled();
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> >  #define alloc_hooks_tag(_tag, _do_alloc)				\
> >  ({									\
> >  	typeof(_do_alloc) _res;						\
> > -	if (mem_alloc_profiling_enabled()) {				\
> > +	if (store_current_tag()) {					\
> >  		struct alloc_tag * __maybe_unused _old;			\
> >  		_old = alloc_tag_save(_tag);				\
> >  		_res = _do_alloc;					\
> 
> I think the work-around is fine, but I'm trying to dig into the root
> cause here.
> 
> As you found, it fails on the final strtomem_pad:
> 
> 	strtomem_pad(key->u.kbd.press_str, press, '\0');
> 	strtomem_pad(key->u.kbd.repeat_str, repeat, '\0');
> 	strtomem_pad(key->u.kbd.release_str, release, '\0');
> 
> (but not the earlier calls??) The destinations are:
> 
> 		char press_str[sizeof(void *) + sizeof(int)] __nonstring;
> 		char repeat_str[sizeof(void *) + sizeof(int)] __nonstring;
> 		char release_str[sizeof(void *) + sizeof(int)] __nonstring;
> 
> Random thoughts include "this is the last array in the struct" which might
> imply bad compiler behavior about its sizing via __builtin_object_size()
> (i.e. trailing array must always be unknown size to deal with
> fake flex arrays), but that wasn't fixed until Clang 16 (with
> -fstrict-flex-arrays=3), so that it doesn't trip in Clang 15 is odd.
> 
> To Kent's comment[1], I believe I was using __builtin_object_size() here
> because I have a knee-jerk aversion to sizeof() due to it blowing up on
> flexible arrays, but that's not relevant here. ARRAY_SIZE() would work,
> but only if type checking to "char *" succeeds, as Kent suggests.

Yeah, that rational for __builtin_object_size() makes sense - although
it's not what the gcc docs say, those talk about getting the size from
an attribute on the allocation function (!).

ARRAY_SIZE() is sizeof() underneath, just used creatively to guarantee
that the input is an array - although that property is probably what we
want here, since strtomem_pad() really only makes sense on static or
flex-arrays, no?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/1] alloc_tag: work around clang-14 issue with __builtin_object_size()
  2025-02-05 20:16   ` Kent Overstreet
@ 2025-02-05 21:28     ` Kees Cook
  2025-02-06 18:13     ` Kees Cook
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2025-02-05 21:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kent Overstreet
  Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan, akpm, nathan, ndesaulniers, morbo,
	justinstitt, linux-mm, linux-kernel, llvm, kernel test robot

On Wed, Feb 05, 2025 at 03:16:12PM -0500, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> ARRAY_SIZE() is sizeof() underneath, just used creatively to guarantee
> that the input is an array - although that property is probably what we
> want here, since strtomem_pad() really only makes sense on static or
> flex-arrays, no?

Exactly. strtomem*/memtostr* are very picky about the destination being
compile-time sized, so sizeof() under the hood seems correct. I'm making
my way through testing a patch now...

-- 
Kees Cook


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 1/1] alloc_tag: work around clang-14 issue with __builtin_object_size()
  2025-02-05 20:16   ` Kent Overstreet
  2025-02-05 21:28     ` Kees Cook
@ 2025-02-06 18:13     ` Kees Cook
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2025-02-06 18:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kent Overstreet
  Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan, akpm, nathan, ndesaulniers, morbo,
	justinstitt, linux-mm, linux-kernel, llvm, kernel test robot

On Wed, Feb 05, 2025 at 03:16:12PM -0500, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 05, 2025 at 11:18:35AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 12:05:03PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > To Kent's comment[1], I believe I was using __builtin_object_size() here
> > because I have a knee-jerk aversion to sizeof() due to it blowing up on
> > flexible arrays, but that's not relevant here. ARRAY_SIZE() would work,
> > but only if type checking to "char *" succeeds, as Kent suggests.
> 
> Yeah, that rational for __builtin_object_size() makes sense - although
> it's not what the gcc docs say, those talk about getting the size from
> an attribute on the allocation function (!).
> 
> ARRAY_SIZE() is sizeof() underneath, just used creatively to guarantee
> that the input is an array - although that property is probably what we
> want here, since strtomem_pad() really only makes sense on static or
> flex-arrays, no?

Okay, here's my proposed fix, and confirmed that it solves the problem:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250206175216.work.225-kees@kernel.org

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2025-02-06 18:13 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-02-01 20:05 [PATCH 1/1] alloc_tag: work around clang-14 issue with __builtin_object_size() Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-02-05 19:18 ` Kees Cook
2025-02-05 19:57   ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-02-05 20:16   ` Kent Overstreet
2025-02-05 21:28     ` Kees Cook
2025-02-06 18:13     ` Kees Cook

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox