Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: Wr+Wj6Y0ocSbIR9yAO92WNuh/YGLbyobEvHDXiG1ZexwGov45LOfcQQmE2Q2a1bCQ5XDZg/i0L
 Z2c/F8ybzlRw==
IronPort-SDR: 3NBT5Xwb6SEKRo45jGptQA52qwK8aymWmWJkzOuVO7mj+KHu+sIDPD98SAV3q69rlVSl8og9gI
 Y6u8Hiyq+EZg==
Date:   Mon, 13 Jul 2020 08:52:40 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com>,
        Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Alexandre Ghiti <alex@ghiti.fr>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] kprobes: Remove MODULES dependency
Message-ID: <20200713055240.GD956284@linux.intel.com>
References: <20200709234521.194005-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20200710193257.4eeb19e9cd042d99cbca7f9a@kernel.org>
 <20200710113238.GH4800@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20200710130429.GA8619@lst.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200710130429.GA8619@lst.de>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 03:04:29PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 01:32:38PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 07:32:57PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > > -	page = module_alloc(PAGE_SIZE);
> > > > +	page = vmalloc(PAGE_SIZE);
> > > 
> > > No, you can not use vmalloc here. The reason why we use module_alloc()
> > > is to allocate the executable memory for trampoline code.
> > > So, you need to use vmalloc_exec() instead.
> > 
> > vmalloc_exec() would be broken too, also hch recently got rid of that
> > thing.
> > 
> > module_alloc() really is the only sane choice here.
> > 
> > We should make module_alloc() unconditionally available, and maybe even
> > rename it to text_alloc().
> 
> I think unconitionally might be a bit too much, but for
> MODULES || KRPOBES or a new symbol select by them makes sense.  As does
> the rename.

Given that they are simple wrappers, would it be too much harmo to have
inline functions for text_alloc() and text_memfree() and use them inside
module_alloc() and alloc_memfree() in order not to initially turn things
over too much?

/Jarkko