Re: [PATCH] [v2] statmount: reduce runtime stack usage

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 13/12/23 17:00, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>

prepare_kstatmount() constructs a copy of 'struct kstatmount' on the stack
and copies it into the local variable on the stack of its caller. Because
of the size of this structure, this ends up overflowing the limit for
a single function's stack frame when prepare_kstatmount() gets inlined
and both copies are on the same frame without the compiler being able
to collapse them into one:

fs/namespace.c:4995:1: error: stack frame size (1536) exceeds limit (1024) in '__se_sys_statmount' [-Werror,-Wframe-larger-than]
  4995 | SYSCALL_DEFINE4(statmount, const struct mnt_id_req __user *, req,

Replace the assignment with an in-place memset() plus assignment that
should always be more efficient for both stack usage and runtime cost.

Cunning plan, to use the work efficient instead of inefficient, ;(

But, TBH, the libc integration seems complex but I also feel there's

no choice and this looks fine too.



Fixes: 49889374ab92 ("statmount: simplify string option retrieval")
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
---
  fs/namespace.c | 15 ++++++---------
  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c
index d036196f949c..159f1df379fc 100644
--- a/fs/namespace.c
+++ b/fs/namespace.c
@@ -4957,15 +4957,12 @@ static int prepare_kstatmount(struct kstatmount *ks, struct mnt_id_req *kreq,
  	if (!access_ok(buf, bufsize))
  		return -EFAULT;
- *ks = (struct kstatmount){
-		.mask		= kreq->param,
-		.buf		= buf,
-		.bufsize	= bufsize,
-		.seq = {
-			.size	= seq_size,
-			.buf	= kvmalloc(seq_size, GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT),
-		},
-	};
+	memset(ks, 0, sizeof(*ks));
+	ks->mask = kreq->param;
+	ks->buf = buf;
+	ks->bufsize = bufsize;
+	ks->seq.size = seq_size;
+	ks->seq.buf = kvmalloc(seq_size, GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
  	if (!ks->seq.buf)
  		return -ENOMEM;
  	return 0;

This looks much better than what it replaces IMHO.


Reviewed-by: Ian Kent <raven@xxxxxxxxxx>


Ian





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux