linux-kernel - Re: Regression: x86/mm: new _PTE_SWP_SOFT_DIRTY bit conflicts with existing use

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, 21 Aug 2013 19:42:38 +0400
From:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
Cc:	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Xen-devel@...ts.xen.org,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: Regression: x86/mm: new _PTE_SWP_SOFT_DIRTY bit conflicts with
 existing use

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 03:53:36PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 21.08.13 at 16:12, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 02:48:20PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> >> All,
> >> 
> >> 179ef71c (mm: save soft-dirty bits on swapped pages) introduces a new
> >> PTE bit on x86 _PTE_SWP_SOFT_DIRTY which has the same value as _PTE_PSE
> >> and _PTE_PAT.
> >> 
> >> With a Xen PV guest, the use of the _PTE_PAT will result in the page
> >> having unexpected cachability which will introduce a range of subtle
> >> performance and correctness issues.  Xen programs the entry 4 in the PAT
> >> table with WC so a page that was previously WB will end up as WC.
> >> 
> > 
> > David, could you please explain, Xen keeps and analyze _PTE_PAT bit
> > for ptes which are not present?
> 
> No, the problem isn't with not-present PTEs (i.e. swap entries),
> but with present ones - the same bit (7) is being used for both,
> according to this comment:
> 
> /*
>  * Tracking soft dirty bit when a page goes to a swap is tricky.
>  * We need a bit which can be stored in pte _and_ not conflict
>  * with swap entry format. On x86 bits 6 and 7 are *not* involved
>  * into swap entry computation, but bit 6 is used for nonlinear
>  * file mapping, so we borrow bit 7 for soft dirty tracking.
>  */
> 
> Or are you telling me that the comment is misleading (at least me),
> and this applies only to not-present PTEs? And even then - where
> would the value of the original PAT bit be stored while swapped
> out (or is it impossible - now and forever - for WC pages to get
> swapped)?

Only to non-present ptes, as far as I know.

do_swap_page
	...
	pte = mk_pte(page, vma->vm_page_prot);

	/* new pte from vm_page_prot generated */
	...
	set_pte_at(mm, address, page_table, pte);
	/* and assigned to old place */

with soft dirty in swap it is somehow more weirdy

	pte = mk_pte(page, vma->vm_page_prot);
	...
	if (pte_swp_soft_dirty(orig_pte))
		pte = pte_mksoft_dirty(pte);
	set_pte_at(mm, address, page_table, pte);

orig_pte has pse bit set if page has been soft dirty
when it reached swap.
--
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/