From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
shakeelb@google.com, 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>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] slub: Add back check for free nonslab objects
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 16:43:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YVM4NJZWNyOhZIIP@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <73b662cc-ab1f-b3bf-468a-4cd744e92d71@huawei.com>
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 03:53:47PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> On 2021/9/27 15:22, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > On 9/27/21 04:15, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > > After commit ("f227f0faf63b slub: fix unreclaimable slab stat for bulk
> > > free"), the check for free nonslab page is replaced by VM_BUG_ON_PAGE,
> > > which only check with CONFIG_DEBUG_VM enabled, but this config may
> > > impact performance, so it only for debug.
> > >
> > > Commit ("0937502af7c9 slub: Add check for kfree() of non slab objects.")
> > > add the ability, which should be needed in any configs to catch the
> > > invalid free, they even could be potential issue, eg, memory corruption,
> > > use after free and double-free, so replace VM_BUG_ON_PAGE to WARN_ON, and
> > > add dump_page() to help use to debug the issue.
> > There are other situations in SLUB (such as with smaller allocations that
> > don't go directly to page allocator) where use after free and double-free
> > are undetected in non-debug configs, and it's expected that anyone debugging
> > them will enable slub_debug or even DEBUG_VM. Why should this special case
> > with nonslab pages be different?
>
> I want the check back in kfree, this one is used widely in driver, and the
> probability
>
> of problem occurred is bigger in driver, especially in some out of tree
> drivers.
Why would we want to improve life for out of tree drivers? Drivers should
be in-tree. That's been the Linux Way for thirty years.
I remain sceptical that dump_page() is actually useful for debugging
drivers anyway. dump_stack(), I could see -- that'll tell you which
driver called kfree() on a bogus pointer. But how does dump_page() help?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-28 15:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-27 2:15 Kefeng Wang
2021-09-27 2:42 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-09-27 3:06 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-09-27 7:22 ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-09-27 7:53 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-09-28 15:43 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2021-09-29 2:06 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-09-29 16:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
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=YVM4NJZWNyOhZIIP@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.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