linux-kernel - Re: [GIT RFC] percpu: use dynamic percpu allocator as the default percpu allocator

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: <49CA1AC3.9080908@kernel.org>
Date:	Wed, 25 Mar 2009 20:51:31 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
CC:	mingo@...e.hu, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, tglx@...utronix.de,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, rmk@....linux.org.uk,
	starvik@...s.com, ralf@...ux-mips.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	cooloney@...nel.org, kyle@...artin.ca, matthew@....cx,
	grundler@...isc-linux.org, takata@...ux-m32r.org,
	benh@...nel.crashing.org, rth@...ddle.net,
	ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [GIT RFC] percpu: use dynamic percpu allocator as the default
 percpu allocator

Hello, Martin.

Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
>>>> With the dynamic percpu allocator there is no need anymore to play
>>>> tricks with the GOTENT relocation for the access to the percpu
>>>> symbols. A simple RELOC_HIDE gets the job done.
>>> Hmm... I don't quite get it.  The GOTENT was to work around large
>>> offsets for modules, right?  Can you please explain what changed by
>>> the dynamic percpu allocator?
> 
> Unfortunately it didn't change. The problem is still there, only with
> my particular configuration (and the correct patch) the system did
> work because the problematic modules were not in use. But in general it
> won't work.
> 
> The reason for the GOTENT indirection are static per-cpu variables that
> are defined inside a module. The compiler considers these to be local.
> For locally defined per_cpu__#var symbols the compiler uses an
> instruction that is limited to the scope of a single object, which is
> +-4 GB. The trick with GOTENT introduced an indirection which hid the
> problem.
> 
> Without the GOTENT indirection the access to a static per cpu variable
> will look like this:
> 
> 0000000000000000 <test_fn>:
>    0:   e3 30 03 30 00 04       lg      %r3,816
>    6:   c0 10 00 00 00 00       larl    %r1,6 <test_fn+0x6>
>                         8: R_390_PC32DBL        .data.percpu+0x2
>    c:   e3 23 10 00 00 04       lg      %r2,0(%r3,%r1)
> 
> The R_390_PC32DBL relocation in the module relocation will fail if the
> per-cpu area is farther than 4GB away from the vmalloc area.

Okay, up to this point, I understand, so nothing really changed for
symbols (core or modules) by the dynamic percpu allocator and they
still need GOTENT, right?

> With your patches and a RELOC_HIDE version that uses the GOTENT
> indirection the kernel won't compile because the "X" constraint for
> the GOTENT access needs a symbol and there are quite a few users that
> pass a pointer. I do not see a simple solution for that problem yet.

Ah... okay.  Now I get it.  It wasn't expecting variables there.  How
about doing the following?

 #define SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR(ptr, offset) (({				\
	 if (__builtin_constant_p(ptr))					\
		 do GOTENT trick;					\
	 else								\
		 RELOC_HIDE();						\
 }))

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/