linux-kernel - Non atomic unaligned writes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 19 Aug 2007 20:55:22 -0400
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	patches@...-64.org, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"S. P. Prasanna" <prasanna@...ibm.com>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Non atomic unaligned writes

* Andi Kleen (ak@...e.de) wrote:
> Normally there are not that many NMIs or MCEs at boot, but it would
> be still good to avoid the very rare crash by auditing the code first
> [better than try to debug it on some production system later]
> 
> > > - smp lock patching only ever changes a single byte (lock prefix) of
> > > a single instruction
> > > - kprobes only ever change a single byte
> > >
> > > For the immediate value patching it also cannot happen because
> > > you'll never modify multiple instructions and all immediate values
> > > can be changed atomically. 
> > >   
> > 
> > Are misaligned/cross-cache-line updates atomic?
> 
> In theory yes, in practice there can be errata of course. There tend 
> to be a couple with self modifying code, especially cross modifying
> (from another CPU) -- but you don't do that.
> 
> -Andi

I must disagree with Andi on this point. Considering the quoted
paragraph below, misaligned/cross-cache-line updates are not atomic.
This is why I align the immediate values in such a way that the
immediate value within the mov instruction is itself aligned.

Intel System Programming Guide

7.1.1 Guaranteed Atomic Operations

The Intel386™, Intel486™, Pentium®, and P6 family processors guarantee
that the following basic memory operations will always be carried out
atomically:
• Reading or writing a byte.
• Reading or writing a word aligned on a 16-bit boundary.
• Reading or writing a doubleword aligned on a 32-bit boundary.
The P6 family processors guarantee that the following additional memory
operations will always be carried out atomically:
• Reading or writing a quadword aligned on a 64-bit boundary. (This
operation is also guaranteed on the Pentium® processor.)
• 16-bit accesses to uncached memory locations that fit within a 32-bit
data bus.
• 16-, 32-, and 64-bit accesses to cached memory that fit within a
32-Byte cache line.

Accesses to cacheable memory that are split across bus widths, cache
lines, and page boundaries are not guaranteed to be atomic by the
Intel486™, Pentium®, or P6 family processors. The P6 family processors
provide bus control signals that permit external memory subsystems to
make split accesses atomic; however, nonaligned data accesses will
seriously impact the performance of the processor and should be avoided
where possible.

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/