Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4] xmalloc: add support for checking the pool integrity

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 17/12/14 09:59, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 16.12.14 at 21:28, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 16/12/14 19:33, Mihai DonÈu wrote:
>>> +static bool_t __xmem_pool_check_locked(const char *file, int line,
>>> +                                       const struct xmem_pool *pool)
>>> +{
>>> +    unsigned int i;
>>> +    static bool_t once = 1;
>> What is this static doing?  Surely corruption corruption in one pool has
>> no effect on corruption in a separate pool (other than the usual side
>> effects of general memory corruption, which tend to be bad).
>>
>> It looks as if it wants to be an extra field in an xmem_pool.
> Question is whether logging more than the first corruption ever is
> really all that useful.

True - as soon as one bit of memory corruption is detected, all other
bets are off.

Might it perhaps be prudent to then panic() on a positive detection of
memory corruption?

>
>
>>> +bool_t __xmem_pool_check(const char *file, int line, struct xmem_pool 
>>> *pool)
>>> +{
>>> +    return __xmem_pool_check_unlocked(file, line, pool ?: xenpool);
>> Why should a NULL pool be tolerated here?  This is debug code only, so
>> we can require and trust that we are called appropriately.
> xenpool is not and should not be visible to code outside this file.

Quite, but the only plausible external callers will be checking pools of
their own.  This patch adds internal callers for checking the xenpool.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel