Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1217579 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-02 14:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-09-02 19:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 4 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
[PATCH v2] x86: fix small LDT allocation for Xen "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2015-09-02 14:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] x86: fix small LDT allocation for Xen Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2015-09-02 16:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] x86: fix small LDT allocation for Xen "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2015-09-02 17:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] x86: fix small LDT allocation for Xen Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2015-09-02 19:00 +0200
| From | "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-02 14:50 +0200 |
| Subject | [PATCH v2] x86: fix small LDT allocation for Xen |
| Message-ID | <q4fEe-5kp-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
While commit 37868fe113 ("x86/ldt: Make modify_ldt synchronous") added
a nice comment explaining that Xen needs page-aligned whole page chunks
for guest descriptor tables, it then nevertheless used kzalloc() on the
small size path. As I'm unaware of guarantees for kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, )
to return page-aligned memory blocks, I believe this needs to be
switched back to __get_free_page().
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
---
v2: Also adjust the freeing side.
---
arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- 4.2/arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c
+++ 4.2-x86-LDT-alloc/arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ static struct ldt_struct *alloc_ldt_stru
if (alloc_size > PAGE_SIZE)
new_ldt->entries = vzalloc(alloc_size);
else
- new_ldt->entries = kzalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
+ new_ldt->entries = (void *)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_ZERO);
if (!new_ldt->entries) {
kfree(new_ldt);
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ static void free_ldt_struct(struct ldt_s
if (ldt->size * LDT_ENTRY_SIZE > PAGE_SIZE)
vfree(ldt->entries);
else
- kfree(ldt->entries);
+ put_page(virt_to_page(ldt->entries));
kfree(ldt);
}
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-02 16:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q4gTE-7hJ-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1217579 |
On Sep 2, 2015 5:46 AM, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
> While commit 37868fe113 ("x86/ldt: Make modify_ldt synchronous") added
> a nice comment explaining that Xen needs page-aligned whole page chunks
> for guest descriptor tables, it then nevertheless used kzalloc() on the
> small size path. As I'm unaware of guarantees for kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, )
> to return page-aligned memory blocks, I believe this needs to be
> switched back to __get_free_page().
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
> Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
> Cc: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
> ---
> v2: Also adjust the freeing side.
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- 4.2/arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c
> +++ 4.2-x86-LDT-alloc/arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c
> @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ static struct ldt_struct *alloc_ldt_stru
> if (alloc_size > PAGE_SIZE)
> new_ldt->entries = vzalloc(alloc_size);
> else
> - new_ldt->entries = kzalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> + new_ldt->entries = (void *)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_ZERO);
>
> if (!new_ldt->entries) {
> kfree(new_ldt);
> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ static void free_ldt_struct(struct ldt_s
> if (ldt->size * LDT_ENTRY_SIZE > PAGE_SIZE)
> vfree(ldt->entries);
> else
> - kfree(ldt->entries);
> + put_page(virt_to_page(ldt->entries));
FWIW, I'm not convinced this is or was correct. Using free_page looks
a bit safer, and free_page does more than just put_page.
Does anyone here know the right way to do this?
--Andy
> kfree(ldt);
> }
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-02 17:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q4isq-UW-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1217622 |
>>> On 02.09.15 at 16:08, <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
> On Sep 2, 2015 5:46 AM, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>
>> While commit 37868fe113 ("x86/ldt: Make modify_ldt synchronous") added
>> a nice comment explaining that Xen needs page-aligned whole page chunks
>> for guest descriptor tables, it then nevertheless used kzalloc() on the
>> small size path. As I'm unaware of guarantees for kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, )
>> to return page-aligned memory blocks, I believe this needs to be
>> switched back to __get_free_page().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
>> Cc: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
>> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
>> ---
>> v2: Also adjust the freeing side.
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> --- 4.2/arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c
>> +++ 4.2-x86-LDT-alloc/arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c
>> @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ static struct ldt_struct *alloc_ldt_stru
>> if (alloc_size > PAGE_SIZE)
>> new_ldt->entries = vzalloc(alloc_size);
>> else
>> - new_ldt->entries = kzalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
>> + new_ldt->entries = (void
> *)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_ZERO);
>>
>> if (!new_ldt->entries) {
>> kfree(new_ldt);
>> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ static void free_ldt_struct(struct ldt_s
>> if (ldt->size * LDT_ENTRY_SIZE > PAGE_SIZE)
>> vfree(ldt->entries);
>> else
>> - kfree(ldt->entries);
>> + put_page(virt_to_page(ldt->entries));
>
> FWIW, I'm not convinced this is or was correct. Using free_page looks
> a bit safer, and free_page does more than just put_page.
Actually I agree. put_page() is meant to be paired with get_page();
__get_free_pages() is just misleading (i.e. doesn't imply a get_page())
and instead is to be paired with free_pages(). Will do a v3 then.
Jan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-02 19:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q4jya-2ro-25@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1217709 |
* Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: > >> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ static void free_ldt_struct(struct ldt_s > >> if (ldt->size * LDT_ENTRY_SIZE > PAGE_SIZE) > >> vfree(ldt->entries); > >> else > >> - kfree(ldt->entries); > >> + put_page(virt_to_page(ldt->entries)); > > > > FWIW, I'm not convinced this is or was correct. Using free_page looks > > a bit safer, and free_page does more than just put_page. > > Actually I agree. put_page() is meant to be paired with get_page(); > __get_free_pages() is just misleading (i.e. doesn't imply a get_page()) > and instead is to be paired with free_pages(). Will do a v3 then. So put_page() is a page cache primitive and should not be used outside of it. As it happens, it is safe to put_page() a regularly allocated page as well, but it's a little bit slower than doing a free_page(). Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web