All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric B Munson <emunson@mgebm.net>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: arnd@arndb.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mingo@elte.hu,
	randy.dunlap@oracle.com, josh@joshtriplett.org,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mgorman@suse.de, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add debugging boundary check to pfn_to_page
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 09:27:48 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110610132748.GA5759@mgebm.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1307566168.3048.137.camel@nimitz>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3380 bytes --]

On Wed, 08 Jun 2011, Dave Hansen wrote:

> On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 15:18 -0400, Eric B Munson wrote:
> > -#define __pfn_to_page(pfn)                             \
> > -({     unsigned long __pfn = (pfn);                    \
> > -       struct mem_section *__sec = __pfn_to_section(__pfn);    \
> > -       __section_mem_map_addr(__sec) + __pfn;          \
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_MEMORY_MODEL
> > +#define __pfn_to_page(pfn)                                             \
> > +({     unsigned long __pfn = (pfn);                                    \
> > +       struct mem_section *__sec = __pfn_to_section(__pfn);            \
> > +       struct page *__page = __section_mem_map_addr(__sec) + __pfn;    \
> > +       WARN_ON(__page->flags == 0);                                    \
> > +       __page;                                                         \
> 
> What was the scenario you're trying to catch here?  If you give a really
> crummy __pfn, you'll probably go off the end of one of the mem_section[]
> arrays, and get garbage back for __sec.  You might also get a NULL back
> from __section_mem_map_addr() if the section is possibly valid, but just
> not present on this particular system.
> 
> I _think_ the only kind of bug this will catch is if you have a valid
> section, with a valid section_mem_map[] but still manage to find
> yourself with an 'struct page' unclaimed by any zone and thus
> uninitialized.

This is the case I was going after.  I will rework for a V2 based on the
feedback here.

> 
> You could catch a lot more cases by being a bit more paranoid:
> 
> void check_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> {
> 	int nid;
> 	
> 	// hacked in from pfn_to_nid:
> 	// Don't actually do this, add a new helper near pfn_to_nid()
> 	// Can this even fit in the physnode_map?
> 	if (pfn / PAGES_PER_ELEMENT > ARRAY_SIZE(physnode_map))
> 		WARN();
> 
> 	// Is there a valid nid there?
> 	nid = pfn_to_nid(pfn);
> 	if (nid == -1)
> 		WARN();
> 	
> 	// check against NODE_DATA(nid)->node_start_pfn;
> 	// check against NODE_DATA(nid)->node_spanned_pages;
> }
> >  })
> > +#else
> > +#define __pfn_to_page(pfn)                                             \
> > +({     unsigned long __pfn = (pfn);                                    \
> > +       struct mem_section *__sec = __pfn_to_section(__pfn);            \
> > +       __section_mem_map_addr(__sec) + __pfn;  \
> > +})
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_MEMORY_MODEL */ 
> 
> Instead of making a completely new __pfn_to_page() in the debugging
> case, I'd probably do something like this:
> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_MEMORY_MODEL
> #define check_foo(foo) {\
> 	some_check_here(foo);\
> 	WARN_ON(foo->flags);\
> }
> #else
> #define check_foo(foo) do{}while(0)
> #endif;
> 
> #define __pfn_to_page(pfn)                                             \
> ({     unsigned long __pfn = (pfn);                                    \
>        struct mem_section *__sec = __pfn_to_section(__pfn);            \
>        struct page *__page = __section_mem_map_addr(__sec) + __pfn;    \
>        check_foo(page)							\
>        __page;                                                         \
>  })
> 
> That'll make sure that the two copies of __pfn_to_page() don't
> accidentally diverge.  It also makes it a lot easier to read, I think.
> 
> -- Dave
> 

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2011-06-10 13:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-08 19:18 [PATCH] Add debugging boundary check to pfn_to_page Eric B Munson
2011-06-08 19:18 ` Eric B Munson
2011-06-08 19:31 ` Randy Dunlap
2011-06-08 19:31   ` Randy Dunlap
2011-06-08 19:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-06-08 19:56   ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-06-08 20:49 ` Dave Hansen
2011-06-08 20:49   ` Dave Hansen
2011-06-10 13:27   ` Eric B Munson [this message]

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=20110610132748.GA5759@mgebm.net \
    --to=emunson@mgebm.net \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.