From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"'linux-mm@kvack.org'" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Cc: 'Kees Cook' <keescook@chromium.org>,
'Christoph Lameter' <cl@linux.com>,
'Pekka Enberg' <penberg@kernel.org>,
'David Rientjes' <rientjes@google.com>,
'Joonsoo Kim' <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
'Andrew Morton' <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
'Eric Dumazet' <edumazet@google.com>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] slab: kmalloc_size_roundup() must not return 0 for non-zero size
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 10:47:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2cb3f35b-a18c-75fa-d73e-95a4fb8cf079@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fcfee37ead054de19871139167aca787@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Please Cc: also R: folks in MAINTAINERS, adding them now.
On 9/6/23 10:18, David Laight wrote:
> The typical use of kmalloc_size_roundup() is:
> ptr = kmalloc(sz = kmalloc_size_roundup(size), ...);
> if (!ptr) return -ENOMEM.
> This means it is vitally important that the returned value isn't
> less than the argument even if the argument is insane.
> In particular if kmalloc_slab() fails or the value is above
> (MAX_ULONG - PAGE_SIZE) zero is returned and kmalloc() will return
> it's single zero-length buffer.
>
> Fix by returning the input size on error or if the size exceeds
> a 'sanity' limit.
> kmalloc() will then return NULL is the size really is too big.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Laight <david.laight@aculab.com>
> Fixes: 05a940656e1eb ("slab: Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup()")
> ---
> The 'sanity limit' value doesn't really matter (even if too small)
> It could be 'MAX_ORDER + PAGE_SHIFT' but one ppc64 has MAX_ORDER 16
> and I don't know if that also has large pages.
Well we do have KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE, which is based on MAX_ORDER + PAGE_SHIFT
(and no issues on ppc64 so I'd expect the combination of MAX_ORDER and
PAGE_SHIFT should always be such that it doesn't overflow on the particular
arch) so I think it would be the most straightforward to simply use that.
> Maybe it could be 1ul << 30 on 64bit, but it really doesn't matter
> if it is too big.
>
> The original patch also added kmalloc_size_roundup() to mm/slob.c
> that can also round up a value to zero - but has since been removed.
>
> mm/slab_common.c | 29 ++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
> index cd71f9581e67..8418eccda8cf 100644
> --- a/mm/slab_common.c
> +++ b/mm/slab_common.c
> @@ -747,22 +747,21 @@ size_t kmalloc_size_roundup(size_t size)
> {
> struct kmem_cache *c;
>
> - /* Short-circuit the 0 size case. */
> - if (unlikely(size == 0))
> - return 0;
> - /* Short-circuit saturated "too-large" case. */
> - if (unlikely(size == SIZE_MAX))
> - return SIZE_MAX;
> - /* Above the smaller buckets, size is a multiple of page size. */
> - if (size > KMALLOC_MAX_CACHE_SIZE)
> - return PAGE_SIZE << get_order(size);
> + if (size && size <= KMALLOC_MAX_CACHE_SIZE) {
I guess the whole test could all be likely().
Also this patch could probably be just replacing the SIZE_MAX test with >=
KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE, but since the majority is expected to be 0 < size <=
KMALLOC_MAX_CACHE_SIZE, your reordering makes sense to me.
> + /*
> + * The flags don't matter since size_index is common to all.
> + * Neither does the caller for just getting ->object_size.
> + */
> + c = kmalloc_slab(size, GFP_KERNEL, 0);
> + return likely(c) ? c->object_size : size;
> + }
>
> - /*
> - * The flags don't matter since size_index is common to all.
> - * Neither does the caller for just getting ->object_size.
> - */
> - c = kmalloc_slab(size, GFP_KERNEL, 0);
> - return c ? c->object_size : 0;
> + /* Return 'size' for 0 and very large - kmalloc() may fail. */
> + if (unlikely((size - 1) >> (sizeof (long) == 8 ? 34 : 30)))
So I'd just test for size == 0 || size > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE?
> + return size;
> +
> + /* Above the smaller buckets, size is a multiple of page size. */
> + return PAGE_SIZE << get_order(size);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(kmalloc_size_roundup);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-06 8:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-06 8:18 David Laight
2023-09-06 8:47 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2023-09-06 9:14 ` David Laight
2023-09-06 18:16 ` Kees Cook
2023-09-07 8:55 ` David Laight
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=2cb3f35b-a18c-75fa-d73e-95a4fb8cf079@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
/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