On Fri, Jun 16, 2023, at 1:50 AM, Mike Rapoport wrote:

From: "Mike Rapoport (IBM)" <rppt@kernel.org>

module_alloc() is used everywhere as a mean to allocate memory for code.

Beside being semantically wrong, this unnecessarily ties all subsystems
that need to allocate code, such as ftrace, kprobes and BPF to modules
and puts the burden of code allocation to the modules code.

Several architectures override module_alloc() because of various
constraints where the executable memory can be located and this causes
additional obstacles for improvements of code allocation.

Start splitting code allocation from modules by introducing
execmem_text_alloc(), execmem_free(), jit_text_alloc(), jit_free() APIs.

Initially, execmem_text_alloc() and jit_text_alloc() are wrappers for
module_alloc() and execmem_free() and jit_free() are replacements of
module_memfree() to allow updating all call sites to use the new APIs.

The intention semantics for new allocation APIs:

* execmem_text_alloc() should be used to allocate memory that must reside
  close to the kernel image, like loadable kernel modules and generated
  code that is restricted by relative addressing.

* jit_text_alloc() should be used to allocate memory for generated code
  when there are no restrictions for the code placement. For
  architectures that require that any code is within certain distance
  from the kernel image, jit_text_alloc() will be essentially aliased to
  execmem_text_alloc().

Is there anything in this series to help users do the appropriate synchronization when the actually populate the allocated memory with code?  See here, for example:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/cb6533c6-cea0-4f04-95cf-b8240c6ab405@app.fastmail.com/T/#u (local)

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel