Re: [RFC 4/7] mm/kasan, mm/vmalloc: Respect GFP flags in kasan_populate_vmalloc()

Baoquan He
2025-07-07T01:47:53Z

On 07/04/25 at 05:25pm, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
......snip.......
> diff --git a/mm/kasan/shadow.c b/mm/kasan/shadow.c
> index d2c70cd2afb1..5edfc1f6b53e 100644
> --- a/mm/kasan/shadow.c
> +++ b/mm/kasan/shadow.c
> @@ -335,13 +335,13 @@ static void ___free_pages_bulk(struct page **pages, int nr_pages)
> }
> }
>
> -static int ___alloc_pages_bulk(struct page **pages, int nr_pages)
> +static int ___alloc_pages_bulk(struct page **pages, int nr_pages, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> {
> unsigned long nr_populated, nr_total = nr_pages;
> struct page **page_array = pages;
>
> while (nr_pages) {
> - nr_populated = alloc_pages_bulk(GFP_KERNEL, nr_pages, pages);
> + nr_populated = alloc_pages_bulk(gfp_mask, nr_pages, pages);
> if (!nr_populated) {
> ___free_pages_bulk(page_array, nr_total - nr_pages);
> return -ENOMEM;
> @@ -353,25 +353,33 @@ static int ___alloc_pages_bulk(struct page **pages, int nr_pages)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int __kasan_populate_vmalloc(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> +static int __kasan_populate_vmalloc(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> {
> unsigned long nr_pages, nr_total = PFN_UP(end - start);
> + bool noblock = !gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp_mask);
> struct vmalloc_populate_data data;
> + unsigned int flags;
> int ret = 0;
>
> - data.pages = (struct page **)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO);
> + data.pages = (struct page **)__get_free_page(gfp_mask | __GFP_ZERO);
> if (!data.pages)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> while (nr_total) {
> nr_pages = min(nr_total, PAGE_SIZE / sizeof(data.pages[0]));
> - ret = ___alloc_pages_bulk(data.pages, nr_pages);
> + ret = ___alloc_pages_bulk(data.pages, nr_pages, gfp_mask);
> if (ret)
> break;
>
> data.start = start;
> + if (noblock)
> + flags = memalloc_noreclaim_save();
> +
> ret = apply_to_page_range(&init_mm, start, nr_pages * PAGE_SIZE,
> kasan_populate_vmalloc_pte, &data);

This series is a great enhancement, thanks.

When checking code, seems apply_to_page_range() will lead to page table
allocation which uses GFP_PGTABLE_KERNEL. Not sure if we need to handle
this either.

> + if (noblock)
> + memalloc_noreclaim_restore(flags);
> +
> ___free_pages_bulk(data.pages, nr_pages);
> if (ret)
> break;
...snip...