From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
"Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/topology: Initialize sd_span after assignment to *sd
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 10:36:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260323093627.GY3738010@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260321163852.11102-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 04:38:52PM +0000, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> Nathan reported a kernel panic on his ARM builds after commit
> 8e8e23dea43e ("sched/topology: Compute sd_weight considering cpuset
> partitions") which was root caused to the compiler zeroing out the first
> few bytes of sd->span.
>
> During the debug [1], it was discovered that, on some configs,
> offsetof(struct sched_domain, span) at 292 was less than
> sizeof(struct sched_domain) at 296 resulting in:
>
> *sd = { ... }
>
> assignment clearing out first 4 bytes of sd->span which was initialized
> before.
>
> The official GCC specification for "Arrays of Length Zero" [2] says:
>
> Although the size of a zero-length array is zero, an array member of
> this kind may increase the size of the enclosing type as a result of
> tail padding.
>
> which means the relative offset of the variable length array at the end
> of the sturct can indeed be less than sizeof() the struct as a result of
> tail padding thus overwriting that data of the flexible array that
> overlapped with the padding whenever the struct is initialized as whole.
WTF! that's terrible :(
Why is this allowed, this makes no bloody sense :/
However the way we allocate space for flex arrays is: sizeof(*obj) +
count * sizeof(*obj->member); this means that we do have sufficient
space, irrespective of this extra padding.
Does this work?
diff --git a/include/linux/sched/topology.h b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
index 51c29581f15e..defa86ed9b06 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched/topology.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/topology.h
@@ -153,7 +153,21 @@ struct sched_domain {
static inline struct cpumask *sched_domain_span(struct sched_domain *sd)
{
- return to_cpumask(sd->span);
+ /*
+ * Because C is an absolutely broken piece of shit, it is allowed for
+ * offsetof(*sd, span) < sizeof(*sd), this means that structure
+ * initialzation *sd = { ... }; which will clear every unmentioned
+ * member, can over-write the start of the flexible array member.
+ *
+ * Luckily, the way we allocate the flexible array is by:
+ *
+ * sizeof(*sd) + count * sizeof(*sd->span)
+ *
+ * this means that we have sufficient space for the whole flex array
+ * *outside* of sizeof(*sd). So use that, and avoid using sd->span.
+ */
+ unsigned long *bitmap = (void *)sd + sizeof(*sd);
+ return to_cpumask(bitmap);
}
extern void partition_sched_domains(int ndoms_new, cpumask_var_t doms_new[],
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-23 9:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-12 4:44 [PATCH v4 0/9] sched/topology: Optimize sd->shared allocation K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 4:44 ` [PATCH v4 1/9] sched/topology: Compute sd_weight considering cpuset partitions K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 9:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-03-12 9:59 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 10:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-03-12 10:09 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-20 23:58 ` Nathan Chancellor
2026-03-21 3:36 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-21 7:33 ` Chen, Yu C
2026-03-21 7:47 ` Chen, Yu C
2026-03-21 8:59 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-21 9:45 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-21 10:13 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-21 12:48 ` Chen, Yu C
2026-03-24 2:54 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-21 14:13 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-03-21 15:14 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-21 16:38 ` [PATCH] sched/topology: Initialize sd_span after assignment to *sd K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-23 9:08 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-03-23 17:34 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-23 9:36 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2026-03-23 13:24 ` Jon Hunter
2026-03-23 15:36 ` Chen, Yu C
2026-03-23 17:24 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-23 22:41 ` Nathan Chancellor
2026-03-24 9:10 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/topology: Fix sched_domain_span() tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2026-03-12 4:44 ` [PATCH v4 2/9] sched/topology: Extract "imb_numa_nr" calculation into a separate helper K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 13:37 ` kernel test robot
2026-03-12 15:42 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 16:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-03-16 0:18 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2026-03-16 3:41 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-16 8:24 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2026-03-16 8:50 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 4:44 ` [PATCH v4 3/9] sched/topology: Allocate per-CPU sched_domain_shared in s_data K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 4:44 ` [PATCH v4 4/9] sched/topology: Switch to assigning "sd->shared" from s_data K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 4:44 ` [PATCH v4 5/9] sched/topology: Remove sched_domain_shared allocation with sd_data K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 4:44 ` [PATCH v4 6/9] sched/core: Check for rcu_read_lock_any_held() in idle_get_state() K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 9:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-03-12 10:06 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 4:44 ` [PATCH v4 7/9] sched/fair: Remove superfluous rcu_read_lock() in the wakeup path K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-15 23:36 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2026-03-16 3:19 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] PM: EM: Switch to rcu_dereference_all() in " tip-bot2 for Dietmar Eggemann
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/fair: Remove superfluous rcu_read_lock() in the " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 4:44 ` [PATCH v4 8/9] sched/fair: Simplify the entry condition for update_idle_cpu_scan() K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-12 4:44 ` [PATCH v4 9/9] sched/fair: Simplify SIS_UTIL handling in select_idle_cpu() K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-18 8:08 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for K Prateek Nayak
2026-03-16 0:22 ` [PATCH v4 0/9] sched/topology: Optimize sd->shared allocation Dietmar Eggemann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260323093627.GY3738010@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome