lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] memory_hotplug: Add a bounds check to __add_pages
From
Date
On 26.09.19 09:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 26-09-19 09:12:50, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 26.09.19 03:34, Alastair D'Silva wrote:
>>> From: Alastair D'Silva <alastair@d-silva.org>
>>>
>>> On PowerPC, the address ranges allocated to OpenCAPI LPC memory
>>> are allocated from firmware. These address ranges may be higher
>>> than what older kernels permit, as we increased the maximum
>>> permissable address in commit 4ffe713b7587
>>> ("powerpc/mm: Increase the max addressable memory to 2PB"). It is
>>> possible that the addressable range may change again in the
>>> future.
>>>
>>> In this scenario, we end up with a bogus section returned from
>>> __section_nr (see the discussion on the thread "mm: Trigger bug on
>>> if a section is not found in __section_nr").
>>>
>>> Adding a check here means that we fail early and have an
>>> opportunity to handle the error gracefully, rather than rumbling
>>> on and potentially accessing an incorrect section.
>>>
>>> Further discussion is also on the thread ("powerpc: Perform a bounds
>>> check in arch_add_memory")
>>> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190827052047.31547-1-alastair@au1.ibm.com
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alastair D'Silva <alastair@d-silva.org>
>>> ---
>>> mm/memory_hotplug.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>>> index c73f09913165..212804c0f7f5 100644
>>> --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>>> +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>>> @@ -278,6 +278,22 @@ static int check_pfn_span(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages,
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int check_hotplug_memory_addressable(unsigned long pfn,
>>> + unsigned long nr_pages)
>>> +{
>>> + unsigned long max_addr = ((pfn + nr_pages) << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1;
>>> +
>>> + if (max_addr >> MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS) {
>>> + WARN(1,
>>> + "Hotplugged memory exceeds maximum addressable address, range=%#lx-%#lx, maximum=%#lx\n",
>>> + pfn << PAGE_SHIFT, max_addr,
>>> + (1ul << (MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS + 1)) - 1);
>>> + return -E2BIG;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * Reasonably generic function for adding memory. It is
>>> * expected that archs that support memory hotplug will
>>> @@ -291,6 +307,10 @@ int __ref __add_pages(int nid, unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages,
>>> unsigned long nr, start_sec, end_sec;
>>> struct vmem_altmap *altmap = restrictions->altmap;
>>>
>>> + err = check_hotplug_memory_addressable(pfn, nr_pages);
>>> + if (err)
>>> + return err;
>>> +
>>> if (altmap) {
>>> /*
>>> * Validate altmap is within bounds of the total request
>>>
>>
>>
>> I know Michal suggested this, but I still prefer checking early instead
>> of when we're knees-deep into adding of memory.
>
> What is your concern here? Unwinding the state should be pretty
> straightfoward from this failure path.

Just the general "check what you can check early without locks"
approach. But yeah, this series is probably not worth a v5, so I can
live with this change just fine :)


--

Thanks,

David / dhildenb

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-26 09:47    [W:0.082 / U:16.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site