|
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jJS=KgLwetdmDAUq9+KhUFTd=jnCES3BZJm+qBwUBmLjQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 12:08:23 -0700 From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> To: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, Sandeep Patil <sspatil@...roid.com>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] gfp: mm: introduce __GFP_NOINIT On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 8:38 AM Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com> wrote: > When passed to an allocator (either pagealloc or SL[AOU]B), __GFP_NOINIT > tells it to not initialize the requested memory if the init_on_alloc > boot option is enabled. This can be useful in the cases newly allocated > memory is going to be initialized by the caller right away. > > __GFP_NOINIT doesn't affect init_on_free behavior, except for SLOB, > where init_on_free implies init_on_alloc. > > __GFP_NOINIT basically defeats the hardening against information leaks > provided by init_on_alloc, so one should use it with caution. > > This patch also adds __GFP_NOINIT to alloc_pages() calls in SL[AOU]B. > Doing so is safe, because the heap allocators initialize the pages they > receive before passing memory to the callers. > > Slowdown for the initialization features compared to init_on_free=0, > init_on_alloc=0: > > hackbench, init_on_free=1: +6.84% sys time (st.err 0.74%) > hackbench, init_on_alloc=1: +7.25% sys time (st.err 0.72%) > > Linux build with -j12, init_on_free=1: +8.52% wall time (st.err 0.42%) > Linux build with -j12, init_on_free=1: +24.31% sys time (st.err 0.47%) > Linux build with -j12, init_on_alloc=1: -0.16% wall time (st.err 0.40%) > Linux build with -j12, init_on_alloc=1: +1.24% sys time (st.err 0.39%) > > The slowdown for init_on_free=0, init_on_alloc=0 compared to the > baseline is within the standard error. > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> > Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> > Cc: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org> > Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com> > Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> > Cc: Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com> > Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> > Cc: Sandeep Patil <sspatil@...roid.com> > Cc: Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com> > Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> > Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> > Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org > Cc: linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org > Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com > --- > include/linux/gfp.h | 6 +++++- > include/linux/mm.h | 2 +- > kernel/kexec_core.c | 2 +- > mm/slab.c | 2 +- > mm/slob.c | 3 ++- > mm/slub.c | 1 + > 6 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h > index fdab7de7490d..66d7f5604fe2 100644 > --- a/include/linux/gfp.h > +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h > @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ struct vm_area_struct; > #else > #define ___GFP_NOLOCKDEP 0 > #endif > +#define ___GFP_NOINIT 0x1000000u I mentioned this in the other patch, but I think this needs to be moved ahead of GFP_NOLOCKDEP and adjust the values for GFP_NOLOCKDEP and to leave the IS_ENABLED() test in __GFP_BITS_SHIFT alone. > /* If the above are modified, __GFP_BITS_SHIFT may need updating */ > > /* > @@ -208,16 +209,19 @@ struct vm_area_struct; > * %__GFP_COMP address compound page metadata. > * > * %__GFP_ZERO returns a zeroed page on success. > + * > + * %__GFP_NOINIT requests non-initialized memory from the underlying allocator. > */ > #define __GFP_NOWARN ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_NOWARN) > #define __GFP_COMP ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_COMP) > #define __GFP_ZERO ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_ZERO) > +#define __GFP_NOINIT ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_NOINIT) > > /* Disable lockdep for GFP context tracking */ > #define __GFP_NOLOCKDEP ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_NOLOCKDEP) > > /* Room for N __GFP_FOO bits */ > -#define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT (23 + IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP)) > +#define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT (25) AIUI, this will break non-CONFIG_LOCKDEP kernels: it should just be: -#define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT (23 + IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP)) +#define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT (24 + IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP)) > #define __GFP_BITS_MASK ((__force gfp_t)((1 << __GFP_BITS_SHIFT) - 1)) > > /** > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h > index ee1a1092679c..8ab152750eb4 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mm.h > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h > @@ -2618,7 +2618,7 @@ DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(init_on_alloc); > static inline bool want_init_on_alloc(gfp_t flags) > { > if (static_branch_unlikely(&init_on_alloc)) > - return true; > + return !(flags & __GFP_NOINIT); > return flags & __GFP_ZERO; What do you think about renaming __GFP_NOINIT to __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT or something? Regardless, yes, this is nice. -- Kees Cook
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.