On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 05:18:15AM +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/mm/kasan/kasan_init.c
[...]
> +#if CONFIG_PGTABLE_LEVELS > 3
> +pud_t kasan_zero_pud[PTRS_PER_PUD] __page_aligned_bss;
> +#endif
> +#if CONFIG_PGTABLE_LEVELS > 2
> +pmd_t kasan_zero_pmd[PTRS_PER_PMD] __page_aligned_bss;
> +#endif
> +pte_t kasan_zero_pte[PTRS_PER_PTE] __page_aligned_bss;
Is there any problem if you don't add the #ifs here? Wouldn't the linker
remove them if they are not used?
Original hunk copied here for easy comparison:
> -static int __init zero_pte_populate(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
> - unsigned long end)
> -{
> - pte_t *pte = pte_offset_kernel(pmd, addr);
> -
> - while (addr + PAGE_SIZE <= end) {
> - WARN_ON(!pte_none(*pte));
> - set_pte(pte, __pte(__pa_nodebug(kasan_zero_page)
> - | __PAGE_KERNEL_RO));
> - addr += PAGE_SIZE;
> - pte = pte_offset_kernel(pmd, addr);
> - }
> - return 0;
> -}
[...]
> +static void __init zero_pte_populate(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
> + unsigned long end)
> +{
> + pte_t *pte = pte_offset_kernel(pmd, addr);
> + pte_t zero_pte;
> +
> + zero_pte = pfn_pte(PFN_DOWN(__pa(kasan_zero_page)), PAGE_KERNEL);
> + zero_pte = pte_wrprotect(zero_pte);
> +
> + while (addr + PAGE_SIZE <= end) {
> + set_pte_at(&init_mm, addr, pte, zero_pte);
> + addr += PAGE_SIZE;
> + pte = pte_offset_kernel(pmd, addr);
> + }
> +}
I think there are some differences with the original x86 code. The first
one is the use of __pa_nodebug, does it cause any problems if
CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL is enabled?
The second is the use of a read-only attribute when mapping
kasan_zero_page on x86. Can it cope with a writable mapping?
If there are no issues, it should be documented in the commit log.
--
Catalin
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>