linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
To: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: 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>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kasan, slub: fix handling of kasan_slab_free hook
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 18:42:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAeHK+y4hze8CUDMJ_G6W+diBO88+WYu892SK9QAt36y8nbZYQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26dd94c5-19ca-dca6-07b8-7103f53c0130@virtuozzo.com>

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
> On 02/23/2018 06:53 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>> The kasan_slab_free hook's return value denotes whether the reuse of a
>> slab object must be delayed (e.g. when the object is put into memory
>> qurantine).
>>
>> The current way SLUB handles this hook is by ignoring its return value
>> and hardcoding checks similar (but not exactly the same) to the ones
>> performed in kasan_slab_free, which is prone to making mistakes.
>>
>
> What are those differences exactly? And what problems do they cause?
> Answers to these questions should be in the changelog.


The difference is that with the old code we end up proceeding with
invalidly freeing an object when an invalid-free (or double-free) is
detected. Will add this in v2.

>
>
>> This patch changes the way SLUB handles this by:
>> 1. taking into account the return value of kasan_slab_free for each of
>>    the objects, that are being freed;
>> 2. reconstructing the freelist of objects to exclude the ones, whose
>>    reuse must be delayed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
>> ---
>
>
>
>
>>
>> @@ -2965,14 +2974,13 @@ static __always_inline void slab_free(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page,
>>                                     void *head, void *tail, int cnt,
>>                                     unsigned long addr)
>>  {
>> -     slab_free_freelist_hook(s, head, tail);
>>       /*
>> -      * slab_free_freelist_hook() could have put the items into quarantine.
>> -      * If so, no need to free them.
>> +      * With KASAN enabled slab_free_freelist_hook modifies the freelist
>> +      * to remove objects, whose reuse must be delayed.
>>        */
>> -     if (s->flags & SLAB_KASAN && !(s->flags & SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU))
>> -             return;
>> -     do_slab_free(s, page, head, tail, cnt, addr);
>> +     slab_free_freelist_hook(s, &head, &tail);
>> +     if (head != NULL)
>
> That's an additional branch in non-debug fast-path. Find a way to avoid this.

Hm, there supposed to be a branch here. We either have objects that we
need to free, or we don't, and we need to do different things in those
cases. Previously this was done with a hardcoded "if (s->flags &
SLAB_KASAN && ..." statement, not it's a different "if (head !=
NULL)".

I could put this check under #ifdef CONFIG_KASAN if the performance is
critical here, but I'm not sure if that's the best solution. I could
also add an "unlikely()" there.

>
>
>> +             do_slab_free(s, page, head, tail, cnt, addr);
>>  }
>>
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_KASAN
>>

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-06 17:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-23 15:53 Andrey Konovalov
2018-03-02 12:10 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2018-03-06 17:42   ` Andrey Konovalov [this message]
2018-03-06 17:47     ` Andrey Konovalov
2018-03-07 12:43     ` Andrey Ryabinin

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=CAAeHK+y4hze8CUDMJ_G6W+diBO88+WYu892SK9QAt36y8nbZYQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=andreyknvl@google.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=kcc@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.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