|
Message-ID: <CAG_fn=VbJXHsqAeBD+g6zJ8WVTko4Ev2xytXrcJ-ztEWm7kOOA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 15:23:26 +0200 From: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, 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 From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Date: Wed, May 8, 2019 at 9:16 PM To: Alexander Potapenko Cc: Andrew Morton, Christoph Lameter, Kees Cook, Laura Abbott, Linux-MM, linux-security-module, Kernel Hardening, Masahiro Yamada, James Morris, Serge E. Hallyn, Nick Desaulniers, Kostya Serebryany, Dmitry Vyukov, Sandeep Patil, Randy Dunlap, Jann Horn, Mark Rutland > 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. Do we really need this blinking GFP_NOLOCKDEP bit at all? This approach doesn't scale, we can't even have a second feature that has a bit depending on the config settings. Cannot we just fix the number of bits instead? > > /* 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 -- Alexander Potapenko Software Engineer Google Germany GmbH Erika-Mann-Straße, 33 80636 München Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
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.