* [PATCH] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0
@ 2012-03-01 19:45 Veli-Pekka Peltola
2012-03-01 20:46 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-03-07 13:09 ` [PATCH v2] " Veli-Pekka Peltola
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Veli-Pekka Peltola @ 2012-03-01 19:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
After commit de7d2b567d040e3b67fe7121945982f14343213d (mm/vmalloc.c: report
more vmalloc failures) users will get a warning if vmalloc_node_range() is
called with size 0. This happens if module's init size equals to 0. This
patch changes ARM, MIPS and x86 module_alloc() to return NULL before calling
vmalloc_node_range() that would also return NULL and print a warning.
Signed-off-by: Veli-Pekka Peltola <veli-pekka.peltola@bluegiga.com>
Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: x86 at kernel.org
---
I found this with ARM but after checking out various implementations of
module_alloc() I thought it would be better to fix all at once.
One way to replicate the warning:
compile kernel with CONFIG_KALLSYMS=n
insmod module without init, I used usb-common.ko
arch/arm/kernel/module.c | 4 ++--
arch/mips/kernel/module.c | 4 ++--
arch/x86/kernel/module.c | 2 +-
3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
index 1e9be5d..d44d212 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
@@ -39,8 +39,8 @@
#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
{
- return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END,
- GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, -1,
+ return size == 0 ? NULL : __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR,
+ MODULES_END, GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, -1,
__builtin_return_address(0));
}
#endif
diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/module.c b/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
index a5066b1..cd768e9 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
@@ -47,8 +47,8 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(dbe_lock);
#ifdef MODULE_START
void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
{
- return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULE_START, MODULE_END,
- GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL, -1,
+ return size == 0 ? NULL : __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULE_START,
+ MODULE_END, GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL, -1,
__builtin_return_address(0));
}
#endif
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
index 925179f..bff6118 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
{
- if (PAGE_ALIGN(size) > MODULES_LEN)
+ if (size == 0 || PAGE_ALIGN(size) > MODULES_LEN)
return NULL;
return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END,
GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC,
--
1.7.5.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [PATCH] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0
2012-03-01 19:45 [PATCH] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0 Veli-Pekka Peltola
@ 2012-03-01 20:46 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-03-07 13:09 ` [PATCH v2] " Veli-Pekka Peltola
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2012-03-01 20:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 03/01/2012 11:45 AM, Veli-Pekka Peltola wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
> index 1e9be5d..d44d212 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
> @@ -39,8 +39,8 @@
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
> {
> - return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END,
> - GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, -1,
> + return size == 0 ? NULL : __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR,
> + MODULES_END, GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, -1,
> __builtin_return_address(0));
> }
> #endif
> diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/module.c b/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
> index a5066b1..cd768e9 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
> @@ -47,8 +47,8 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(dbe_lock);
> #ifdef MODULE_START
> void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
> {
> - return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULE_START, MODULE_END,
> - GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL, -1,
> + return size == 0 ? NULL : __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULE_START,
> + MODULE_END, GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL, -1,
> __builtin_return_address(0));
> }
> #endif
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
> index 925179f..bff6118 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
> @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
>
> void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
> {
> - if (PAGE_ALIGN(size) > MODULES_LEN)
> + if (size == 0 || PAGE_ALIGN(size) > MODULES_LEN)
> return NULL;
> return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END,
> GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC,
Looks good stylistically but really awkward technically.
I would like to suggest using the idiom:
if (!size)
return NULL;
... consistently; combined with the PAGE_ALIGN() clause for x86 is fine too.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0
2012-03-01 19:45 [PATCH] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0 Veli-Pekka Peltola
2012-03-01 20:46 ` H. Peter Anvin
@ 2012-03-07 13:09 ` Veli-Pekka Peltola
2012-03-19 15:36 ` Veli-Pekka Peltola
2013-06-27 9:39 ` Ralf Baechle
1 sibling, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Veli-Pekka Peltola @ 2012-03-07 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
After commit de7d2b567d040e3b67fe7121945982f14343213d (mm/vmalloc.c: report
more vmalloc failures) users will get a warning if vmalloc_node_range() is
called with size 0. This happens if module's init size equals to 0. This
patch changes ARM, MIPS and x86 module_alloc() to return NULL before calling
vmalloc_node_range() that would also return NULL and print a warning.
Signed-off-by: Veli-Pekka Peltola <veli-pekka.peltola@bluegiga.com>
Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: x86 at kernel.org
---
I found this with ARM but after checking out various implementations of
module_alloc() I thought it would be better to fix all at once.
One way to replicate the warning:
compile kernel with CONFIG_KALLSYMS=n
insmod a module without init, I used usb-common.ko
Changes since v1:
- changed style as hpa suggested
arch/arm/kernel/module.c | 2 ++
arch/mips/kernel/module.c | 2 ++
arch/x86/kernel/module.c | 2 +-
3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
index 1e9be5d..17648e2 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
@@ -39,6 +39,8 @@
#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
{
+ if (!size)
+ return NULL;
return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END,
GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, -1,
__builtin_return_address(0));
diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/module.c b/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
index a5066b1..1a51de1 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
@@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(dbe_lock);
#ifdef MODULE_START
void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
{
+ if (!size)
+ return NULL;
return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULE_START, MODULE_END,
GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL, -1,
__builtin_return_address(0));
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
index 925179f..fd44d69 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
{
- if (PAGE_ALIGN(size) > MODULES_LEN)
+ if (!size || PAGE_ALIGN(size) > MODULES_LEN)
return NULL;
return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END,
GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC,
--
1.7.5.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0
2012-03-07 13:09 ` [PATCH v2] " Veli-Pekka Peltola
@ 2012-03-19 15:36 ` Veli-Pekka Peltola
2013-06-27 9:39 ` Ralf Baechle
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Veli-Pekka Peltola @ 2012-03-19 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi,
On 03/07/2012 03:09 PM, Veli-Pekka Peltola wrote:
> After commit de7d2b567d040e3b67fe7121945982f14343213d (mm/vmalloc.c: report
> more vmalloc failures) users will get a warning if vmalloc_node_range() is
> called with size 0. This happens if module's init size equals to 0. This
> patch changes ARM, MIPS and x86 module_alloc() to return NULL before calling
> vmalloc_node_range() that would also return NULL and print a warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Veli-Pekka Peltola<veli-pekka.peltola@bluegiga.com>
> Cc: Russell King<linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner<tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar<mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin"<hpa@zytor.com>
> Cc: x86 at kernel.org
> ---
> I found this with ARM but after checking out various implementations of
> module_alloc() I thought it would be better to fix all at once.
>
> One way to replicate the warning:
> compile kernel with CONFIG_KALLSYMS=n
> insmod a module without init, I used usb-common.ko
>
> Changes since v1:
> - changed style as hpa suggested
>
> arch/arm/kernel/module.c | 2 ++
> arch/mips/kernel/module.c | 2 ++
> arch/x86/kernel/module.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
> index 1e9be5d..17648e2 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/module.c
> @@ -39,6 +39,8 @@
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
> {
> + if (!size)
> + return NULL;
> return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END,
> GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, -1,
> __builtin_return_address(0));
> diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/module.c b/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
> index a5066b1..1a51de1 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/module.c
> @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(dbe_lock);
> #ifdef MODULE_START
> void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
> {
> + if (!size)
> + return NULL;
> return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULE_START, MODULE_END,
> GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL, -1,
> __builtin_return_address(0));
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
> index 925179f..fd44d69 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
> @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
>
> void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
> {
> - if (PAGE_ALIGN(size)> MODULES_LEN)
> + if (!size || PAGE_ALIGN(size)> MODULES_LEN)
> return NULL;
> return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END,
> GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC,
Any comments on this? Should I split all architectures to separate patches?
I just tested 3.3 on ARM and x86, both printed a warning and call trace
without this patch.
--
Veli-Pekka Peltola
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0
2012-03-07 13:09 ` [PATCH v2] " Veli-Pekka Peltola
2012-03-19 15:36 ` Veli-Pekka Peltola
@ 2013-06-27 9:39 ` Ralf Baechle
2013-06-27 22:23 ` Andrew Morton
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ralf Baechle @ 2013-06-27 9:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Warming up an ancient thread because the discussion seems to have just
stalled at some point and I still have this patch bitrotting in patchwork.
The original thread can be found at:
http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2012-03/msg00006.html
http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2012-03/msg00028.html
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 03:09:28PM +0200, Veli-Pekka Peltola wrote:
> After commit de7d2b567d040e3b67fe7121945982f14343213d (mm/vmalloc.c: report
> more vmalloc failures) users will get a warning if vmalloc_node_range() is
> called with size 0. This happens if module's init size equals to 0. This
> patch changes ARM, MIPS and x86 module_alloc() to return NULL before calling
> vmalloc_node_range() that would also return NULL and print a warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Veli-Pekka Peltola <veli-pekka.peltola@bluegiga.com>
> Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
> Cc: x86 at kernel.org
> ---
> I found this with ARM but after checking out various implementations of
> module_alloc() I thought it would be better to fix all at once.
>
> One way to replicate the warning:
> compile kernel with CONFIG_KALLSYMS=n
> insmod a module without init, I used usb-common.ko
I didn't try to reproduce the issue but the code in question doesn't seem
to have changed so the issue should still persist.
Imho de7d2b567d040e3b67fe7121945982f14343213d [mm/vmalloc.c: report more
vmalloc failures] is overly strict in that it also reports zero-sized
allocations. I consider such allocations stupid but legitimiate and often
better preferrable over having to scatter checks for zero size all over
place. So maybe something like below patch?
Thanks,
Ralf
---
Signed-off-by: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
mm/vmalloc.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index d365724..e58ca10 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -1679,7 +1679,10 @@ void *__vmalloc_node_range(unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
unsigned long real_size = size;
size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
- if (!size || (size >> PAGE_SHIFT) > totalram_pages)
+ if (unlikely(!size))
+ return NULL;
+
+ if ((size >> PAGE_SHIFT) > totalram_pages)
goto fail;
area = __get_vm_area_node(size, align, VM_ALLOC | VM_UNLIST,
@@ -1711,6 +1714,7 @@ fail:
warn_alloc_failed(gfp_mask, 0,
"vmalloc: allocation failure: %lu bytes\n",
real_size);
+
return NULL;
}
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0
2013-06-27 9:39 ` Ralf Baechle
@ 2013-06-27 22:23 ` Andrew Morton
2013-06-27 22:46 ` Joe Perches
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2013-06-27 22:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:39:17 +0200 Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> wrote:
> Imho de7d2b567d040e3b67fe7121945982f14343213d [mm/vmalloc.c: report more
> vmalloc failures] is overly strict in that it also reports zero-sized
> allocations. I consider such allocations stupid but legitimiate and often
> better preferrable over having to scatter checks for zero size all over
> place. So maybe something like below patch?
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -1679,7 +1679,10 @@ void *__vmalloc_node_range(unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
> unsigned long real_size = size;
>
> size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> - if (!size || (size >> PAGE_SHIFT) > totalram_pages)
> + if (unlikely(!size))
> + return NULL;
> +
> + if ((size >> PAGE_SHIFT) > totalram_pages)
> goto fail;
>
> area = __get_vm_area_node(size, align, VM_ALLOC | VM_UNLIST,
> @@ -1711,6 +1714,7 @@ fail:
> warn_alloc_failed(gfp_mask, 0,
> "vmalloc: allocation failure: %lu bytes\n",
> real_size);
> +
> return NULL;
> }
If the caller actually dereferences the returned pointer the kernel
will go oops, which should provide adequate notification of a
programming error ;) But all callers should be checking the return
value. So I worry about the by-far-most-common case where code does
size = some_screwed_up_calculation();
p = vmalloc(size);
if (!p)
return -ENOMEM;
So the mistake gets propagated back to who-knows-where as memory
exhaustion and thereby becomes a lot harder to diagnose.
How many callsites really truly need to be edited to avoid the warning?
Veli-Pekka's original patch would be neater if we were to add a new
void *__vmalloc_node_range_zero_size_ok(<args>)
{
if (size == 0)
return NULL;
return __vmalloc_node_range(<args>);
}
(with a better name than __vmalloc_node_range_zero_size_ok!)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0
2013-06-27 22:23 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2013-06-27 22:46 ` Joe Perches
2013-07-01 3:18 ` Rusty Russell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Joe Perches @ 2013-06-27 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 15:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:39:17 +0200 Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> wrote:
[]
> Veli-Pekka's original patch would be neater if we were to add a new
>
> void *__vmalloc_node_range_zero_size_ok(<args>)
> {
> if (size == 0)
> return NULL;
I believe you mean
return ZERO_SIZE_PTR;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0
2013-06-27 22:46 ` Joe Perches
@ 2013-07-01 3:18 ` Rusty Russell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Rusty Russell @ 2013-07-01 3:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> writes:
> On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 15:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:39:17 +0200 Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> wrote:
> []
>> Veli-Pekka's original patch would be neater if we were to add a new
>>
>> void *__vmalloc_node_range_zero_size_ok(<args>)
>> {
>> if (size == 0)
>> return NULL;
>
> I believe you mean
> return ZERO_SIZE_PTR;
Yes, this is the Right Fix.
Thanks,
Rusty.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-07-01 3:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-03-01 19:45 [PATCH] mm: module_alloc: check if size is 0 Veli-Pekka Peltola
2012-03-01 20:46 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-03-07 13:09 ` [PATCH v2] " Veli-Pekka Peltola
2012-03-19 15:36 ` Veli-Pekka Peltola
2013-06-27 9:39 ` Ralf Baechle
2013-06-27 22:23 ` Andrew Morton
2013-06-27 22:46 ` Joe Perches
2013-07-01 3:18 ` Rusty Russell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).