Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/4] Protectable Memory Allocator | From | Igor Stoppa <> | Date | Mon, 19 Jun 2017 10:12:22 +0300 |
| |
On 09/06/17 21:56, Laura Abbott wrote: > On 06/07/2017 05:35 AM, Igor Stoppa wrote:
[...]
> The pool logic looks remarkably similar to genalloc (lib/genalloc.c). > It's not a perfect 1-to-1 mapping but it's close enough to be worth > a look.
Indeed. I have prepared a new incarnation of pmalloc, based on genalloc. There are a couple of things that I would like to adjust in genalloc, but I'll discuss this in the new submission.
>> + >> +const char msg[] = "Not a valid Pmalloc object."; >> +const char *__pmalloc_check_object(const void *ptr, unsigned long n) >> +{ >> + unsigned long p; >> + >> + p = (unsigned long)ptr; >> + n = p + n - 1; >> + for (; (PAGE_MASK & p) <= (PAGE_MASK & n); p += PAGE_SIZE) { >> + if (is_vmalloc_addr((void *)p)) { >> + struct page *page; >> + >> + page = vmalloc_to_page((void *)p); >> + if (!(page && PagePmalloc(page))) >> + return msg; >> + } > > Should this be an error if is_vmalloc_addr returns false?
Yes, if this function is called, at least the beginning of the range *is* a vmalloc address and therefore the rest should be a vmalloc address as well.
thanks, igor
| |