Re: [PATCH v5 36/37] s390/kmsan: Implement the architecture-specific functions
From: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Date: 2024-06-20 13:39:06
Also in:
linux-mm, linux-s390, lkml
On Thu, 2024-06-20 at 11:25 +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 05:44:11PM +0200, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: Hi Ilya,quoted
+static inline bool is_lowcore_addr(void *addr) +{ + return addr >= (void *)&S390_lowcore && + addr < (void *)(&S390_lowcore + 1); +} + +static inline void *arch_kmsan_get_meta_or_null(void *addr, bool is_origin) +{ + if (is_lowcore_addr(addr)) { + /* + * Different lowcores accessed via S390_lowcore are described + * by the same struct page. Resolve the prefix manually in + * order to get a distinct struct page. + */quoted
+ addr += (void *)lowcore_ptr[raw_smp_processor_id()] - + (void *)&S390_lowcore;If I am not mistaken neither raw_smp_processor_id() itself, nor lowcore_ptr[raw_smp_processor_id()] are atomic. Should the preemption be disabled while the addr is calculated? But then the question arises - how meaningful the returned value is? AFAICT kmsan_get_metadata() is called from a preemptable context. So if the CPU is changed - how useful the previous CPU lowcore meta is?
This code path will only be triggered by instrumented code that accesses lowcore. That code is supposed to disable preemption; if it didn't, it's a bug in that code and it should be fixed there.
Is it a memory block that needs to be ignored instead?quoted
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(is_lowcore_addr(addr))) + return NULL;lowcore_ptr[] pointing into S390_lowcore is rather a bug.
Right, but AFAIK BUG() calls are discouraged. I guess in a debug tool the rules are more relaxed, but we can recover from this condition here easily, that's why I still went for WARN_ON_ONCE().
quoted
+ return kmsan_get_metadata(addr, is_origin); + } + return NULL; +}Thanks!