Re: [PATCH v2 2.6.38-rc8-tip 11/20] 11: uprobes: slot allocation for uprobes

[Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

* Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> [2011-03-15 13:10:20]:

> Just a couple of minor notes while I was looking at this code...
> 
> > +static struct uprobes_xol_area *xol_alloc_area(void)
> > +{
> > +	struct uprobes_xol_area *area = NULL;
> > +
> > +	area = kzalloc(sizeof(*area), GFP_USER);
> > +	if (unlikely(!area))
> > +		return NULL;
> > +
> > +	area->bitmap = kzalloc(BITS_TO_LONGS(UINSNS_PER_PAGE) * sizeof(long),
> > +								GFP_USER);
> 
> Why GFP_USER?  That causes extra allocation limits to be enforced.  Given
> that in part 14 you have:

Okay, Will use GFP_KERNEL. 
We used GFP_USER because we thought its going to represent part of
process address space; 

> 
> +/* Prepare to single-step probed instruction out of line. */
> +static int pre_ssout(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs,
> +				unsigned long vaddr)
> +{
> +	xol_get_insn_slot(uprobe, vaddr);
> +	BUG_ON(!current->utask->xol_vaddr);
> 
> It seems to me that you really don't want those allocations to fail.
> 
> back to xol_alloc_area():
> 
> > +	if (!area->bitmap)
> > +		goto fail;
> > +
> > +	spin_lock_init(&area->slot_lock);
> > +	if (!xol_add_vma(area) && !current->mm->uprobes_xol_area) {
> > +		task_lock(current);
> > +		if (!current->mm->uprobes_xol_area) {
> > +			current->mm->uprobes_xol_area = area;
> > +			task_unlock(current);
> > +			return area;
> > +		}
> > +		task_unlock(current);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +fail:
> > +	if (area) {
> > +		if (area->bitmap)
> > +			kfree(area->bitmap);
> > +		kfree(area);
> > +	}
> 
> You've already checked area against NULL, and kfree() can handle null
> pointers, so both of those tests are unneeded.

Okay, 

> 
> > +	return current->mm->uprobes_xol_area;
> > +}
> 
> jon

-- 
Thanks and Regards
Srikar