From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Patrick Wang <patrick.wang.shcn@gmail.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yee.lee@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: kmemleak: check boundary of objects allocated with physical address when scan
Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 17:29:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YpZCWbfNE32EzCnz@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220531150823.1004101-1-patrick.wang.shcn@gmail.com>
On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 11:08:23PM +0800, Patrick Wang wrote:
> @@ -1132,8 +1135,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(kmemleak_no_scan);
> void __ref kmemleak_alloc_phys(phys_addr_t phys, size_t size, int min_count,
> gfp_t gfp)
> {
> - if (PHYS_PFN(phys) >= min_low_pfn && PHYS_PFN(phys) < max_low_pfn)
> - kmemleak_alloc(__va(phys), size, min_count, gfp);
> + pr_debug("%s(0x%p, %zu, %d)\n", __func__, __va(phys), size, min_count);
I'd print just phys here since that's the function argument.
> + if (kmemleak_enabled && (unsigned long)__va(phys) >= PAGE_OFFSET &&
> + !IS_ERR(__va(phys)))
> + /* create object with OBJECT_PHYS flag */
> + create_object((unsigned long)__va(phys), size, min_count,
> + gfp, true);
Do we still need to check for __va(phys) >= PAGE_OFFSET? Also I don't
think IS_ERR(__va(phys)) makes sense, we can't store an error in a
physical address. The kmemleak_alloc_phys() function is only called on
successful allocation, so shouldn't bother with error codes.
> @@ -1436,6 +1441,13 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
> dump_object_info(object);
> }
> #endif
> +
> + /* outside lowmem, make it black */
Maybe a bit more verbose:
/* ignore objects outside lowmem (paint them black) */
> + if (object->flags & OBJECT_PHYS)
> + if (PHYS_PFN(__pa((void *)object->pointer)) < min_low_pfn ||
> + PHYS_PFN(__pa((void *)object->pointer)) >= max_low_pfn)
> + __paint_it(object, KMEMLEAK_BLACK);
I'd skip the checks if the object is OBJECT_NO_SCAN (side-effect of
__paint_it()) so that the next scan won't have to go through the __pa()
checks again. It's also probably more correct to check the upper object
boundary). Something like:
if ((object->flags & OBJECT_PHYS) &&
!(object->flags & OBJECT_NO_SCAN)) {
unsigned long phys = __pa((void *)object->pointer);
if (PHYS_PFN(phys) < min_low_pfn ||
PHYS_PFN(phys + object->size) >= max_low_pfn)
__paint_it(object, KMEMLEAK_BLACK);
}
Thanks.
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-31 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-31 15:08 [PATCH] mm: kmemleak: check boundary of objects allocated with physical address when scan Patrick Wang
2022-05-31 16:29 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2022-06-01 10:24 ` Patrick Wang
2022-06-01 16:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-06-02 10:22 ` patrick wang
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=YpZCWbfNE32EzCnz@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=patrick.wang.shcn@gmail.com \
--cc=yee.lee@mediatek.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.