| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <49CCF415.7080201@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:43:17 -0700
From: Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about PRIVATE_FUTEX
Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 19:56 +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
>>
>>>>> Then, get_futex_value_locked calls __cpy_from_user_inatomic with
>>>>> pagefault_disable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who make sure the user page is mapped at app's page table ?
>>>> Nobody, all uses of get_futex_value_locked() have to deal with it
>>>> returning -EFAULT.
>>> Does It mean that __copy_from_user_inatomic in get_futex_value_locked
>>> would be failed rather than sleep?
>> Correct.
>>
>>> In fact, I don't make sure _copy_from_user_inatomic function's meaning.
>>> As far as I understand, It never sleep. It just can be failed in case
>>> of user page isn't mapped. Is right ?
>> Correct.
>>
>>> Otherwise, it can be scheduled with pagefault_disable which increments
>>> preempt_count. It is a atomic bug.
>>> If my assume is right, it can be failed rather than sleep.
>>> At this case, other architecture implements __copy_from_user_inatomic
>>> with __copy_from_user which can be scheduled. It also can be bug.
>>>
>>> Hmm, Now I am confusing.
>> Confused I guess ;-)
>> The trick is in the in_atomic() check in the pagefault handler and the
>> fixup section of the copy routines.
>
> Whew~, There was good hidden trick.
> I will dive into this assembly.
> I always thanks for your kindness. :)
>
>> #define __copy_user(to, from, size) \
>> do { \
>> int __d0, __d1, __d2; \
>> __asm__ __volatile__( \
>> " cmp $7,%0\n" \
>> " jbe 1f\n" \
>> " movl %1,%0\n" \
>> " negl %0\n" \
>> " andl $7,%0\n" \
>> " subl %0,%3\n" \
>> "4: rep; movsb\n" \
>> " movl %3,%0\n" \
>> " shrl $2,%0\n" \
>> " andl $3,%3\n" \
>> " .align 2,0x90\n" \
>> "0: rep; movsl\n" \
>> " movl %3,%0\n" \
>> "1: rep; movsb\n" \
>> "2:\n" \
>> ".section .fixup,\"ax\"\n" \
>> "5: addl %3,%0\n" \
>> " jmp 2b\n" \
>> "3: lea 0(%3,%0,4),%0\n" \
>> " jmp 2b\n" \
>> ".previous\n" \
>> ".section __ex_table,\"a\"\n" \
>> " .align 4\n" \
>> " .long 4b,5b\n" \
>> " .long 0b,3b\n" \
>> " .long 1b,2b\n" \
>> ".previous" \
>> : "=&c"(size), "=&D" (__d0), "=&S" (__d1), "=r"(__d2) \
>> : "3"(size), "0"(size), "1"(to), "2"(from) \
>> : "memory"); \
>> } while (0)
>>
>> see that __ex_table section, it tells the fault handler where to
>> continue in case of an atomic fault.
>>
>>>> Most of this is legacy btw, from when futex ops were done under the
>>>> mmap_sem. Back then we couldn't fault because that would cause mmap_sem
>>>> recursion. Howver, now that we don't hold mmap_sem anymore we could use
>>>> a faulting user access like get_user().
>>>> Darren has been working on patches to clean that up, some of those are
>>>> already merged in the -tip tree.
I'm a little late to the party I guess. Minchan, a lot of the fault
logic has been cleaned up in the tip tree, core/futexes branch. The
removes a lot of the legacy complication from the faulting paths.
However, the get_futex_key code remains the same if I remember correctly.
>>> Thanks for good information.
>>> It will be very desirable way to enhance kernel performance.
>> I doubt it'll make a measurable difference, if you need to fault
>> performance sucks anyway. If you don't, the current code is just as
>> fast.
>>
Agreed. If you are suffering performance hits from excessive paging,
consider locking your memory.
--
Darren Hart
IBM Linux Technology Center
Real-Time Linux Team
--
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