linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86: make text

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]

Message-ID: <20090302230915.GA11626@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 3 Mar 2009 00:09:15 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
Cc:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86: make text_poke() atomic


* Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >>> * Masami Hiramatsu (mhiramat@...hat.com) wrote:
> >>>> Index: linux-2.6/init/main.c
> >>>> ===================================================================
> >>>> --- linux-2.6.orig/init/main.c
> >>>> +++ linux-2.6/init/main.c
> >>>> @@ -676,6 +676,9 @@ asmlinkage void __init start_kernel(void
> >>>>  	taskstats_init_early();
> >>>>  	delayacct_init();
> >>>>
> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86
> >>>> +	text_poke_init();
> >>>> +#endif
> >>> All good, except this above. There should be an empty text_poke_init()
> >>> in some header file, and an implementation for the X86 arch rather than
> >>> a ifdef in init/main.c.
> >> Hmm, I'd rather use __weak function instead of defining it in some header
> >> files, because text_poke() and alternatives exist only on x86.
> >>
> >> I know that we need to discuss cross modifying code on x86 with
> >> Arjan or other Intel engineers. This patch may still be useful
> >> for removing unnecessary vm_area allocation in text_poke().
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Use map_vm_area() instead of vmap() in text_poke() for 
> >> avoiding page allocation and delayed unmapping, and call 
> >> vunmap_page_range() and local_flush_tlb() directly because 
> >> this mapping is temporary and local.
> >>
> >> At the result of above change, text_poke() becomes atomic and 
> >> can be called from stop_machine() etc.
> > 
> > That looks like a good fix in itself - see a few minor details 
> > below.
> 
> Thank you for review,
> 
> > 
> > (Note, i could not try your patch because it has widespread 
> > whitespace damage - please watch out for this for future 
> > patches.)
> 
> Oops, it was my mis-setting...
> 
> > 
> >> +static struct vm_struct *text_poke_area[2];
> >> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(text_poke_lock);
> >> +
> >> +void __init text_poke_init(void)
> >> +{
> >> +	text_poke_area[0] = get_vm_area(PAGE_SIZE, VM_ALLOC);
> >> +	text_poke_area[1] = get_vm_area(2 * PAGE_SIZE, VM_ALLOC);
> >> +	BUG_ON(!text_poke_area[0] || !text_poke_area[1]);
> > 
> > BUG_ON() for non-100%-essential init code is a no-no. Please 
> > change it to WARN_ON() so that people have a chance to report i.
> 
> Sure.
> 
> > 
> > Also, i think all these vma complications came from the decision 
> > to use vmap - and vmap enhancements in .29 complicated this 
> > supposedly-simple interface.
> > 
> > So perhaps another approach to (re-)consider would be to go back 
> > to atomic fixmaps here. It spends 3 slots but that's no big 
> > deal.
> 
> Oh, it's a good idea! fixmaps must make it simpler.
> 
> > 
> > In exchange it will be conceptually simpler, and will also scale 
> > much better than a global spinlock. What do you think?
> 
> I think even if I use fixmaps, we have to use a spinlock to protect
> the fixmap area from other threads...

that's why i suggested to use an atomic-kmap, not a fixmap.

	Ingo
--
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/