|
Message-ID: <20170803135549.GW12521@dhcp22.suse.cz> Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 15:55:50 +0200 From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> To: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...wei.com> Cc: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [RFC] Tagging of vmalloc pages for supporting the pmalloc allocator On Thu 03-08-17 15:20:31, Igor Stoppa wrote: > On 03/08/17 14:48, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 03-08-17 13:11:45, Igor Stoppa wrote: > >> On 02/08/17 20:08, Jerome Glisse wrote: > >>> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 06:14:28PM +0300, Igor Stoppa wrote: > > [...] > > >>>> from include/linux/mm_types.h: > >>>> > >>>> struct page { > >>>> ... > >>>> union { > >>>> unsigned long private; /* Mapping-private opaque data: > >>>> * usually used for buffer_heads > >>>> * if PagePrivate set; used for > >>>> * swp_entry_t if PageSwapCache; > >>>> * indicates order in the buddy > >>>> * system if PG_buddy is set. > >>>> */ > > [...] > > >> If the "Mapping-private" was dropped or somehow connected exclusively to > >> the cases listed in the comment, then I think it would be more clear > >> that the comment needs to be intended as related to mapping in certain > >> cases only. > >> But it is otherwise ok to use the "private" field for whatever purpose > >> it might be suitable, as long as it is not already in use. > > > > I would recommend adding a new field into the enum... > > s/enum/union/ ? > > If not, I am not sure what is the enum that you are talking about. yeah, fat fingers on my side > > [...] > > >> But, to reply more specifically to your advice, yes, I think I could add > >> a flag to vm_struct and then retrieve its value, for the address being > >> processed, by passing through find_vm_area(). > > > > ... and you can store vm_struct pointer to the struct page there > > "there" as in the new field of the union? > btw, what would be a meaningful name, since "private" is already taken? > > For simplicity, I'll use, for now, "private2" why not explicit vm_area? > > and you> won't need to do the slow find_vm_area. I haven't checked > very closely > > but this should be possible in principle. I guess other callers might > > benefit from this as well. > > I am confused about this: if "private2" is a pointer, but when I get an > address, I do not even know if the address represents a valid pmalloc > page, how can i know when it's ok to dereference "private2"? because you can make all pages which back vmalloc mappings have vm_area pointer set. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.