Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220623111937.6491-1-yee.lee@mediatek.com> <20220623111937.6491-2-yee.lee@mediatek.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220623111937.6491-2-yee.lee@mediatek.com>
From:   Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Jun 2022 13:59:59 +0200
Message-ID: <CANpmjNN-jsZoVmJWD2Dz6O3_YVjy0av6e0iD-+OYXpik1LbLvg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: kfence: skip kmemleak alloc in kfence_pool
To:     yee.lee@mediatek.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        "open list:KFENCE" <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        "open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 23 Jun 2022 at 13:20, yee.lee via kasan-dev
<kasan-dev@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> From: Yee Lee <yee.lee@mediatek.com>
>
> Use MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_NOLEAKTRACE to skip kmemleak registration when
> the kfence pool is allocated from memblock. And the kmemleak_free
> later can be removed too.

Is this purely meant to be a cleanup and non-functional change?

> Signed-off-by: Yee Lee <yee.lee@mediatek.com>
>
> ---
>  mm/kfence/core.c | 18 ++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/kfence/core.c b/mm/kfence/core.c
> index 4e7cd4c8e687..0d33d83f5244 100644
> --- a/mm/kfence/core.c
> +++ b/mm/kfence/core.c
> @@ -600,14 +600,6 @@ static unsigned long kfence_init_pool(void)
>                 addr += 2 * PAGE_SIZE;
>         }
>
> -       /*
> -        * The pool is live and will never be deallocated from this point on.
> -        * Remove the pool object from the kmemleak object tree, as it would
> -        * otherwise overlap with allocations returned by kfence_alloc(), which
> -        * are registered with kmemleak through the slab post-alloc hook.
> -        */
> -       kmemleak_free(__kfence_pool);

This appears to only be a non-functional change if the pool is
allocated early. If the pool is allocated late using page-alloc, then
there'll not be a kmemleak_free() on that memory and we'll have the
same problem.