From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:57528 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1728354AbeJLWFn (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 12 Oct 2018 18:05:43 -0400
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 16:32:54 +0200
From: Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
        kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, daniel@iogearbox.net,
        keescook@chromium.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
        will.deacon@arm.com, davem@davemloft.net, tglx@linutronix.de,
        mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, x86@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
        sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, kristen@linux.intel.com,
        arjan@linux.intel.com, deneen.t.dock@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] arm64/modules: Add rlimit checking for arm64
 modules
Message-ID: <20181012143254.idy65qbvaaw5k3ge@linux-8ccs>
References: <20181011233117.7883-1-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
 <20181011233117.7883-5-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
 <25951d99-8ba7-5c9e-938e-baf92395f9e0@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <25951d99-8ba7-5c9e-938e-baf92395f9e0@intel.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

+++ Dave Hansen [11/10/18 16:47 -0700]:
>On 10/11/2018 04:31 PM, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
>> +	if (check_inc_mod_rlimit(size))
>> +		return NULL;
>> +
>>  	p = __vmalloc_node_range(size, MODULE_ALIGN, module_alloc_base,
>>  				module_alloc_base + MODULES_VSIZE,
>>  				gfp_mask, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, 0,
>> @@ -65,6 +68,8 @@ void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
>>  		return NULL;
>>  	}
>>
>> +	update_mod_rlimit(p, size);
>
>Is there a reason we couldn't just rename all of the existing per-arch
>module_alloc() calls to be called, say, "arch_module_alloc()", then put
>this new rlimit code in a generic helper that does:
>
>
>	if (check_inc_mod_rlimit(size))
>		return NULL;
>
>	p = arch_module_alloc(...);
>
>	...
>
>	update_mod_rlimit(p, size);
>

I second this suggestion. Just make module_{alloc,memfree} generic,
non-weak functions that call the rlimit helpers in addition to the
arch-specific arch_module_{alloc,memfree} functions.

Jessica