From: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>,
Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huaweicloud.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/vmalloc: Add a safer version of find_vm_area() for debug
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2023 00:19:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230901001917.GA2723108@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZPDuaI2kTTKCivXa@pc636>
On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 09:47:52PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 05:18:25PM +0000, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > It is unsafe to dump vmalloc area information when trying to do so from
> > some contexts. Add a safer trylock version of the same function to do a
> > best-effort VMA finding and use it from vmalloc_dump_obj().
> >
> > [apply test robot feedback on unused function fix.]
> >
> > Reported-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huaweicloud.com>
> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
> > Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
> > ---
> > v1->v2: Apply review tags and test robot feedback.
> >
> > mm/vmalloc.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > index 93cf99aba335..f09e882ae3b8 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > @@ -1865,6 +1865,20 @@ struct vmap_area *find_vmap_area(unsigned long addr)
> > return va;
> > }
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK
> > +static struct vmap_area *find_vmap_area_trylock(unsigned long addr)
> > +{
> > + struct vmap_area *va;
> > +
> > + if (!spin_trylock(&vmap_area_lock))
> > + return NULL;
> > + va = __find_vmap_area(addr, &vmap_area_root);
> > + spin_unlock(&vmap_area_lock);
> > +
> > + return va;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > static struct vmap_area *find_unlink_vmap_area(unsigned long addr)
> > {
> > struct vmap_area *va;
> > @@ -2671,6 +2685,29 @@ struct vm_struct *find_vm_area(const void *addr)
> > return va->vm;
> > }
> >
> > +/**
> > + * try_to_find_vm_area - find a continuous kernel virtual area
> > + * @addr: base address
> > + *
> > + * This function is the same as find_vm_area() except that it is
> > + * safe to call if vmap_area_lock is already held and returns NULL
> > + * if it is. See comments in find_vmap_area() for other details.
> > + *
> > + * Return: the area descriptor on success or %NULL on failure.
> > + */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK
> > +static struct vm_struct *try_to_find_vm_area(const void *addr)
> > +{
> > + struct vmap_area *va;
> > +
> > + va = find_vmap_area_trylock((unsigned long)addr);
> > + if (!va)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + return va->vm;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > /**
> > * remove_vm_area - find and remove a continuous kernel virtual area
> > * @addr: base address
> > @@ -4277,7 +4314,7 @@ bool vmalloc_dump_obj(void *object)
> > struct vm_struct *vm;
> > void *objp = (void *)PAGE_ALIGN((unsigned long)object);
> >
> > - vm = find_vm_area(objp);
> > + vm = try_to_find_vm_area(objp);
> > if (!vm)
> > return false;
> > pr_cont(" %u-page vmalloc region starting at %#lx allocated at %pS\n",
Hi Vlad,
Thanks for taking a look.
> I am not sure if this patch makes a lot of sense. I agree, this is a
> problem and it mitigates it. But it is broken in terms of once you drop
> the lock, the VA should not be accessed.
Just to note the lockless-access issue you are referring to is not introduced
by this patch but is rather in the existing code. Also just to note this is
debug code.
> Is that a real issue or it gets triggered due to some syntetic test case?
It is a real issue. See 2/2.
> If i were you, i would go with open-coded version of trylock. Because
> there is only one user so far.
Taking your open coding and locking suggestions, I came up with the below
which actually results in a smaller patch. Does it look good to you?
diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index 93cf99aba335..aaf6bad997a7 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -4274,14 +4274,31 @@ void pcpu_free_vm_areas(struct vm_struct **vms, int nr_vms)
#ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK
bool vmalloc_dump_obj(void *object)
{
+ void *caller, *objp = (void *)PAGE_ALIGN((unsigned long)object);
struct vm_struct *vm;
- void *objp = (void *)PAGE_ALIGN((unsigned long)object);
+ struct vmap_area *va;
+ unsigned long addr;
+ unsigned int nr_pages;
- vm = find_vm_area(objp);
- if (!vm)
+ if (!spin_trylock(&vmap_area_lock))
+ return false;
+ va = __find_vmap_area((unsigned long)addr, &vmap_area_root);
+ if (!va) {
+ spin_unlock(&vmap_area_lock);
return false;
+ }
+
+ vm = va->vm;
+ if (!vm) {
+ spin_unlock(&vmap_area_lock);
+ return false;
+ }
+ addr = vm->addr;
+ caller = vm->caller;
+ nr_pages = vm->nr_pages;
+ spin_unlock(&vmap_area_lock);
pr_cont(" %u-page vmalloc region starting at %#lx allocated at %pS\n",
- vm->nr_pages, (unsigned long)vm->addr, vm->caller);
+ nr_pages, addr, caller);
return true;
}
#endif
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-01 0:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-31 17:18 [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/vmalloc: Add a safer version of find_vm_area() for debug Joel Fernandes (Google)
2023-08-31 17:18 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] rcu: Dump vmalloc memory info safely Joel Fernandes (Google)
2023-08-31 19:47 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/vmalloc: Add a safer version of find_vm_area() for debug Uladzislau Rezki
2023-09-01 0:19 ` Joel Fernandes [this message]
2023-09-01 0:33 ` Joel Fernandes
2023-09-01 12:48 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2023-09-01 16:41 ` Joel Fernandes
2023-09-04 8:29 ` Uladzislau Rezki
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=20230901001917.GA2723108@google.com \
--to=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lstoakes@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thunder.leizhen@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox