linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@huawei.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: keescook@chromium.org, mhocko@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
	paul@paul-moore.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov, casey@schaufler-ca.com,
	hch@infradead.org, labbott@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Protectable Memory Allocator
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 15:23:12 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a9c0b60b-d540-785b-3455-d35ae051b891@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201706062108.JDD17143.MOQFFVtHLJOFOS@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>


On 06/06/17 15:08, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Igor Stoppa wrote:
>>>> +struct pmalloc_node {
>>>> +	struct hlist_node nodes_list;
>>>> +	atomic_t used_words;
>>>> +	unsigned int total_words;
>>>> +	__PMALLOC_ALIGNED align_t data[];
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> Is this __PMALLOC_ALIGNED needed? Why not use "long" and "BITS_PER_LONG" ?
>>
>> In an earlier version I actually asked the same question.
>> It is currently there because I just don't know enough about various
>> architectures. The idea of having "align_t" was that it could be tied
>> into what is the most desirable alignment for each architecture.
>> But I'm actually looking for advise on this.
> 
> I think that let the compiler use natural alignment is OK.

On a 64 bit machine the preferred alignment might be either 32 or 64,
depending on the application. How can the compiler choose?


>>> You need to check for node != NULL before dereference it.
>>
>> So, if I understood correctly, there shouldn't be a case where node is
>> NULL, right?
>> Unless it has been tampered/damaged. Is that what you mean?
> 
> I meant to say
> 
> +	node = __pmalloc_create_node(req_words);
> // this location.
> +	starting_word = atomic_fetch_add(req_words, &node->used_words);

argh, yes


>>>> +const char *__pmalloc_check_object(const void *ptr, unsigned long n)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	unsigned long p;
>>>> +
>>>> +	p = (unsigned long)ptr;
>>>> +	n += (unsigned long)ptr;
>>>> +	for (; (PAGE_MASK & p) <= (PAGE_MASK & n); p += PAGE_SIZE) {
>>>> +		if (is_vmalloc_addr((void *)p)) {
>>>> +			struct page *page;
>>>> +
>>>> +			page = vmalloc_to_page((void *)p);
>>>> +			if (!(page && PagePmalloc(page)))
>>>> +				return msg;
>>>> +		}
>>>> +	}
>>>> +	return NULL;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> I feel that n is off-by-one if (ptr + n) % PAGE_SIZE == 0
>>> according to check_page_span().
>>
>> It seems to work. If I am missing your point, could you please
>> use the same format of the example I made, to explain me?
> 
> If ptr == NULL and n == PAGE_SIZE so that (ptr + n) % PAGE_SIZE == 0,
> this loop will access two pages (one page containing p == 0 and another
> page containing p == PAGE_SIZE) when this loop should access only one
> page containing p == 0. When checking n bytes, it's range is 0 to n - 1.

oh, so:

p = (unsigned long) ptr;
n = p + n - 1;


--
igor

--
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:[~2017-06-06 12:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-05 19:22 Igor Stoppa
2017-06-05 19:22 ` [PATCH 1/5] LSM: Convert security_hook_heads into explicit array of struct list_head Igor Stoppa
2017-06-05 19:22 ` [PATCH 2/5] Protectable Memory Allocator Igor Stoppa
2017-06-06  4:44   ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-06  6:25     ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-06-06 11:34       ` Igor Stoppa
2017-06-06 16:24         ` Laura Abbott
2017-06-06 11:42     ` Igor Stoppa
2017-06-06 12:08       ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-06 12:23         ` Igor Stoppa [this message]
2017-06-05 19:22 ` [PATCH 3/5] Protectable Memory Allocator - Debug interface Igor Stoppa
2017-06-05 20:24   ` [kernel-hardening] " Jann Horn
2017-06-06  9:00     ` Igor Stoppa
2017-06-05 19:22 ` [PATCH 4/5] Make LSM Writable Hooks a command line option Igor Stoppa
2017-06-05 19:53   ` Casey Schaufler
2017-06-05 20:50     ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-06  8:58       ` Igor Stoppa
2017-06-06 10:54         ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-06 11:12           ` Igor Stoppa
2017-06-06 11:42             ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-06 12:11               ` Igor Stoppa
2017-06-06 14:36                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-06-06 14:51                   ` Igor Stoppa
2017-06-06 15:17                     ` Casey Schaufler

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=a9c0b60b-d540-785b-3455-d35ae051b891@huawei.com \
    --to=igor.stoppa@huawei.com \
    --cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
    /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