Re: [PATCH v3] dma-buf: dma-heap: Add a size check for allocation

["Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>]

Am 14.01.22 um 00:26 schrieb John Stultz:
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 5:05 AM Christian König
> <christian.koenig@amd.com> wrote:
>> Am 13.01.22 um 14:00 schrieb Ruhl, Michael J:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of
>>>> Ruhl, Michael J
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of
>>>>> guangming.cao@mediatek.com
>>>>> +   /*
>>>>> +    * Invalid size check. The "len" should be less than totalram.
>>>>> +    *
>>>>> +    * Without this check, once the invalid size allocation runs on a process
>>>>> that
>>>>> +    * can't be killed by OOM flow(such as "gralloc" on Android devices), it
>>>>> will
>>>>> +    * cause a kernel exception, and to make matters worse, we can't find
>>>>> who are using
>>>>> +    * so many memory with "dma_buf_debug_show" since the relevant
>>>>> dma-buf hasn't exported.
>>>>> +    */
>>>>> +   if (len >> PAGE_SHIFT > totalram_pages())
>>>> If your "heap" is from cma, is this still a valid check?
>>> And thinking a bit further, if I create a heap from something else (say device memory),
>>> you will need to be able to figure out the maximum allowable check for the specific
>>> heap.
>>>
>>> Maybe the heap needs a callback for max size?
>> Well we currently maintain a separate allocator and don't use dma-heap,
>> but yes we have systems with 16GiB device and only 8GiB system memory so
>> that check here is certainly not correct.
> Good point.
>
>> In general I would rather let the system run into -ENOMEM or -EINVAL
>> from the allocator instead.
> Probably the simpler solution is to push the allocation check to the
> heap driver, rather than doing it at the top level here.
>
> For CMA or other contiguous heaps, letting the allocator fail is fast
> enough. For noncontiguous buffers, like the system heap, the
> allocation can burn a lot of time and consume a lot of memory (causing
> other trouble) before a large allocation might naturally fail.

Yeah, letting a alloc_page() loop run for a while is usually not nice at 
all :)

You can still do a sanity check here, e.g. the size should never have 
the most significant bit set for example.

Regards,
Christian.

>
> thanks
> -john