Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] drivers: base: cacheinfo: fix shared_cpu_map

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Date: Fri Jan 20 2023 - 06:27:33 EST


On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 10:00:39AM +0100, Pierre Gondois wrote:
> Hello Yong-Xuan,
> Except for the nit below, I tried the patch and everything seemed ok, so
> with that:
> Reviewed-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@xxxxxxx>
>
> Regards,
> Pierre
>
> On 12/19/22 11:51, Yong-Xuan Wang wrote:
> > The cacheinfo sets up the shared_cpu_map by checking whether the caches
> > with the same index are shared between CPUs. However, this will trigger
> > slab-out-of-bounds access if the CPUs do not have the same cache hierarchy.
> > Another problem is the mismatched shared_cpu_map when the shared cache does
> > not have the same index between CPUs.
> >
> > CPU0 I D L3
> > index 0 1 2 x
> > ^ ^ ^ ^
> > index 0 1 2 3
> > CPU1 I D L2 L3
> >
> > This patch checks each cache is shared with all caches on other CPUs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yong-Xuan Wang <yongxuan.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/base/cacheinfo.c | 25 +++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
> > index 950b22cdb5f7..d38f80f6fff1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
> > @@ -256,7 +256,7 @@ static int cache_shared_cpu_map_setup(unsigned int cpu)
> > {
> > struct cpu_cacheinfo *this_cpu_ci = get_cpu_cacheinfo(cpu);
> > struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, *sib_leaf;
> > - unsigned int index;
> > + unsigned int index, sib_index;
> > int ret = 0;
> > if (this_cpu_ci->cpu_map_populated)
> > @@ -284,11 +284,12 @@ static int cache_shared_cpu_map_setup(unsigned int cpu)
> > if (i == cpu || !sib_cpu_ci->info_list)
> > continue;/* skip if itself or no cacheinfo */
> > -
> > - sib_leaf = per_cpu_cacheinfo_idx(i, index);
> > - if (cache_leaves_are_shared(this_leaf, sib_leaf)) {
> > - cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &sib_leaf->shared_cpu_map);
> > - cpumask_set_cpu(i, &this_leaf->shared_cpu_map);
> > + for (sib_index = 0; sib_index < cache_leaves(i); sib_index++) {
> > + sib_leaf = per_cpu_cacheinfo_idx(i, sib_index);;
>
> It seems there are 2 ';' above (same in the block below).

Yes, the kernel test robot complains about this as well.

It needs to be fixed before this change can be accepted.

thanks,

greg k-h