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:	Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:15:56 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
Cc:	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC] virtio: use mandatory barriers for remote processor vdevs

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 06:04:56PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> > I see. And this happens because the ARM processor reorders
> > memory writes
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > And in an SMP configuration, writes are somehow not reordered?
> 
> They are, but then the smp memory barriers are enough to control these
> effects. It's not enough to control reordering as seen by a device
> (which is what our AMP processors are) though.
> 
> (btw, the difference between an SMP processor and a device here lies
> in how the memory is mapped: normal memory vs. device memory
> attributes. it's an ARM thingy).

How are the rings mapped? normal memory, right?
We allocate them with plan alloc_pages_exact in virtio_pci.c ...

> > Just checking that this is not a bug in the smp_wmb implementation
> > for the specific platform.
> 
> No, it's not.
> 
> ARM's smp memory barriers use ARM's DMB instruction, which is enough
> to control SMP effects, whereas ARM's mandatory memory barriers use
> ARM's DSB instruction, which is required to ensure the ordering
> between Device and Normal memory accesses.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ohad.

Yes wmb() is required to ensure ordering for MMIO.
But here both accesses: index and ring - are for
memory, not MMIO.

I could understand ring kick bypassing index write, maybe ...
But you described an index write bypassing descriptor write.
Is this something you see in practice?


-- 
MST
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ