Re: [PATCH v4 05/15] mm: introduce execmem_alloc() and execmem_free()

From: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>,
	 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Bjorn Topel <bjorn@kernel.org>,
	 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	 "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@kernel.org>,
	 Donald Dutile <ddutile@redhat.com>,
	Eric Chanudet <echanude@redhat.com>,
	 Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
	 Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>,
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
	 Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
	 Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>,
	 Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
	 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org,  linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	 linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-modules@vger.kernel.org,  linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,  linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
	 netdev@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/15] mm: introduce execmem_alloc() and execmem_free()
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 09:13:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW4au6v8k8Ab7Ff6Yj64rGvZ7wkz=Xrgh8ZZtLyscpChqQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZiE91CJcNw7gBj9g@kernel.org>

On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 8:37 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
[...]
> >
> > Is +/- 2G enough for all realistic use cases? If so, I guess we don't
> > really need
> > EXECMEM_ANYWHERE below?
> >
> > > >
> > > > * I'm not sure about BPF's requirements; it seems happy doing the same as
> > > >   modules.
> > >
> > > BPF are happy with vmalloc().
> > >
> > > > So if we *must* use a common execmem allocator, what we'd reall want is our own
> > > > types, e.g.
> > > >
> > > >       EXECMEM_ANYWHERE
> > > >       EXECMEM_NOPLT
> > > >       EXECMEM_PREL32
> > > >
> > > > ... and then we use those in arch code to implement module_alloc() and friends.
> > >
> > > I'm looking at execmem_types more as definition of the consumers, maybe I
> > > should have named the enum execmem_consumer at the first place.
> >
> > I think looking at execmem_type from consumers' point of view adds
> > unnecessary complexity. IIUC, for most (if not all) archs, ftrace, kprobe,
> > and bpf (and maybe also module text) all have the same requirements.
> > Did I miss something?
>
> It's enough to have one architecture with different constrains for kprobes
> and bpf to warrant a type for each.
>

AFAICT, some of these constraints can be changed without too much work.

> Where do you see unnecessary complexity?
>
> > IOW, we have
> >
> > enum execmem_type {
> >         EXECMEM_DEFAULT,
> >         EXECMEM_TEXT,
> >         EXECMEM_KPROBES = EXECMEM_TEXT,
> >         EXECMEM_FTRACE = EXECMEM_TEXT,
> >         EXECMEM_BPF = EXECMEM_TEXT,      /* we may end up without
> > _KPROBE, _FTRACE, _BPF */
> >         EXECMEM_DATA,  /* rw */
> >         EXECMEM_RO_DATA,
> >         EXECMEM_RO_AFTER_INIT,
> >         EXECMEM_TYPE_MAX,
> > };
> >
> > Does this make sense?
>
> How do you suggest to deal with e.g. riscv that has separate address spaces
> for modules, kprobes and bpf?

IIUC, modules and bpf use the same address space on riscv, while kprobes use
vmalloc address. I haven't tried this yet, but I think we can let
kprobes use the
same space as modules and bpf, which is:

ffffffff00000000 |  -4     GB | ffffffff7fffffff |    2 GB | modules, BPF

Did I get this right?

Thanks,
Song