linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm: warn potential return NULL for kmalloc_array and kvmalloc_array with __GFP_NOFAIL
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024 09:23:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zp4I1r7AsthU2pY4@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGsJ_4y3+L_VvBuiAYLvZTgNqRBc=hXXVB+hA79LUSf22oq8iw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat 20-07-24 08:36:16, Barry Song wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 9:30 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri 19-07-24 21:02:10, Barry Song wrote:
> > > what about an earlier WARN_ON, for example, even before we begin to
> > > try the allocation?
> >
> > Page allocator is a hot path and adding checks for something that
> > shouldn't really even exist is not a great addition there IMHO.
> 
> I would argue adding checks for something that shouldn't really
> even exist is precisely the point of having those checks. These
> checks help ensure the integrity and robustness of the system
> by catching unexpected conditions. I agree that the page allocator
> is a hot path, but adding one line might not cause noticeable
> overhead, especially considering that alloc_pages() already
> contains a few hundred lines of code.

We do not add stuff like that into hot path.

> Regardless, let me try to summarize the discussions. Unless
> anyone has better ideas, v2 series might start with the following
> actions:
> 
> 1. Update the documentation for GFP_NOFAIL to explicitly state
> that non-wait GFP_NOFAIL is not legal and should be avoided.
> This will provide a basis for other subsystems to explicitly
> reject anyone using GFP_ATOMIC | GFP_NOFAIL, etc.

No objection to that.

> 2. Add BUG_ON() at the existing points where we return NULL
> for GFP_NOFAIL -  __alloc_pages_slowpath() , kmalloc, vmalloc
> to avoid exposing security vulnerabilities.

Let's see how this goes.

> 3. Raise a bug report to the vdpa maintainer, requesting that they
> either drop GFP_ATOMIC or GFP_NOFAIL based on whether
> their context is atomic. If GFP_NOFAIL is dropped, ask for an
> explicit check on the return value.

GPF_ATOMIC is likely used because of write_lock(&domain->bounce_lock)
vduse_domain_remove_user_bounce_pages is iself called with spin lock held
from vduse_domain_release. So you would need some pre-allocation.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  reply	other threads:[~2024-07-22  7:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-07-17 23:00 Barry Song
2024-07-18  6:58 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18  7:04   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-18  7:12     ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18  8:16       ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-18  7:22   ` Barry Song
2024-07-18  7:27     ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18  7:41       ` Barry Song
2024-07-18  7:53         ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18  8:18           ` Barry Song
2024-07-18  8:32             ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-18  8:43               ` Barry Song
2024-07-18  8:50                 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19  0:35                   ` Barry Song
2024-07-19  7:02                     ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19  7:07                       ` Barry Song
2024-07-19  7:42                         ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19  7:51                           ` Barry Song
2024-07-19  8:01                             ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19  8:28                               ` Barry Song
2024-07-19  8:40                                 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19  9:36                                   ` Barry Song
2024-07-19  9:45                                     ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19  9:58                                       ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 10:57                                         ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 11:05                                           ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 11:19                                             ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19  8:50                               ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-19  9:33                                 ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 10:10                                   ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-19 10:52                                     ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 11:13                                       ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-19 11:26                                         ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-19 13:02                                           ` Barry Song
2024-07-19 13:30                                             ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-20  0:36                                               ` Barry Song
2024-07-22  7:23                                                 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2024-07-22  7:34                                                   ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-19  7:37                       ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-19  7:43                         ` Barry Song
2024-07-19  7:53                           ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-20 22:14                             ` Barry Song
2024-07-22  7:26                               ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-22  8:09                                 ` Barry Song
2024-07-22  9:01                                   ` Michal Hocko
2024-07-22 23:18                                     ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-22 23:22                                       ` Barry Song
2024-07-19  8:35                     ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-18  7:48 ` Hailong Liu
2024-07-18  8:33   ` Barry Song

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=Zp4I1r7AsthU2pY4@tiehlicka \
    --to=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=21cnbao@gmail.com \
    --cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lstoakes@gmail.com \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=v-songbaohua@oppo.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /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