linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: use pgd accessors when cloning a pgd range.

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: <4CC85839.4000507@goop.org>
Date:	Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:50:01 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: use pgd accessors when cloning a pgd range.

 On 10/27/2010 03:40 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 09:50:13AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> Page tables should always be updated using the proper accessor
>> methods. Not doing so bypasses the paravirt infrastructure.
>>
>> In this case the failure to do so was exposed under Xen by
>> b40827fa7268 "x86-32, mm: Add an initial page table for core
>> bootstrapping".
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>
>> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
>> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
>> ---
>>  arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h |    5 ++++-
>>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> index ada823a..0b4c514 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> @@ -619,7 +619,10 @@ static inline void ptep_set_wrprotect(struct mm_struct *mm,
>>   */
>>  static inline void clone_pgd_range(pgd_t *dst, pgd_t *src, int count)
>>  {
>> -       memcpy(dst, src, count * sizeof(pgd_t));
>> +	int i;
>> +
>> +	for (i=0; i<count; i++)
>> +		set_pgd(&dst[i], src[i]);
> Hmm, this slows down clone_pgd_range(). It is called at 3 sites total,
> two of which happen only on boot in setup_arch() so they can be ignored
> but the callchain
>
> copy_process()
> ...
> mm_init()
> |->mm_alloc_pgd()
>   |->pgd_alloc()
>     |->pgd_ctor()
>       |->clone_pgd_range()
>
> could become noticeable. To be on the safe side, I'd make
> clone_pgd_range() a macro calling either the native or the xen version..

Frankly I'd want to see some numbers before getting too worried about
it; if it were a problem we could make the native set_pgd inlined into
the callside (it is just a memory write after all), which will be very
similar to memcpy in performance.

I am, however, more concerned about the effect on performance under
Xen.  xen_set_pgd will avoid doing a hypercall in this case (the
pagetable isn't yet pinned), but it has to do a moderate amount of work
to avoid doing the hypercall, and could really add some measurable
latency to process creation (which is not something we need right now). 
For that a clone_pgd_range() hypercall is the most straightforward
answer, but I'm loathe to propose that right now.

This never used to be a problem.  Perhaps we can change how
clone_pgd_range is used at boot time to avoid it in the Xen case (since
we don't care about the secondary pagetable)?

    J
--
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/