On 8 Oct 2024, at 4:26, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 07.10.24 20:23, Zi Yan wrote: >> Commit 6471384af2a6 ("mm: security: introduce init_on_alloc=1 and >> init_on_free=1 boot options") forces allocated page to be cleared in >> post_alloc_hook() when init_on_alloc=1. >> >> For non PMD folios, if arch does not define >> vma_alloc_zeroed_movable_folio(), the default implementation again clears >> the page return from the buddy allocator. So the page is cleared twice. >> Fix it by passing __GFP_ZERO instead to avoid double page clearing. >> At the moment, s390,arm64,x86,alpha,m68k are not impacted since they >> define their own vma_alloc_zeroed_movable_folio(). >> >> For PMD folios, folio_zero_user() is called to clear the folio again. >> Fix it by calling folio_zero_user() only if init_on_alloc is set. >> All arch are impacted. >> >> Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> include/linux/highmem.h | 14 ++------------ >> mm/huge_memory.c | 4 +++- >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/highmem.h b/include/linux/highmem.h >> index 930a591b9b61..4b15224842e1 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/highmem.h >> +++ b/include/linux/highmem.h >> @@ -220,18 +220,8 @@ static inline void clear_user_highpage(struct page *page, unsigned long vaddr) >> * Return: A folio containing one allocated and zeroed page or NULL if >> * we are out of memory. >> */ >> -static inline >> -struct folio *vma_alloc_zeroed_movable_folio(struct vm_area_struct *vma, >> - unsigned long vaddr) >> -{ >> - struct folio *folio; >> - >> - folio = vma_alloc_folio(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE, 0, vma, vaddr, false); >> - if (folio) >> - clear_user_highpage(&folio->page, vaddr); >> - >> - return folio; >> -} >> +#define vma_alloc_zeroed_movable_folio(vma, vaddr) \ >> + vma_alloc_folio(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE | __GFP_ZERO, 0, vma, vaddr, false) >> #endif >> static inline void clear_highpage(struct page *page) >> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c >> index a7b05f4c2a5e..ff746151896f 100644 >> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c >> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c >> @@ -1177,7 +1177,9 @@ static vm_fault_t __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf, >> goto release; >> } >> - folio_zero_user(folio, vmf->address); >> + if (!static_branch_maybe(CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON, >> + &init_on_alloc)) >> + folio_zero_user(folio, vmf->address); >> /* >> * The memory barrier inside __folio_mark_uptodate makes sure that >> * folio_zero_user writes become visible before the set_pmd_at() > > I remember we discussed that in the past and that we do *not* want to sprinkle these CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON checks all over the kernel. > > Ideally, we'd use GFP_ZERO and have the buddy just do that for us? There is the slight chance that we zero-out when we're not going to use the allocated folio, but ... that can happen either way even with the current code? I agree that putting CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON here is not ideal, but folio_zero_user() uses vmf->address to improve cache performance by changing subpage clearing order. See commit c79b57e462b5 ("mm: hugetlb: clear target sub-page last when clearing huge page”). If we use GFP_ZERO, we lose this optimization. To keep it, vmf->address will need to be passed to allocation code. Maybe that is acceptable? Best Regards, Yan, Zi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature