linux-kernel - Re: bit fields && data tearing

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: <1409785893.30640.118.camel@pasglop>
Date:	Thu, 04 Sep 2014 09:11:33 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
Cc:	Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Miroslav Franc <mfranc@...hat.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bit fields && data tearing

On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 18:51 -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:

> Apologies for hijacking this thread but I need to extend this discussion
> somewhat regarding what a compiler might do with adjacent fields in a structure.
> 
> The tty subsystem defines a large aggregate structure, struct tty_struct.
> Importantly, several different locks apply to different fields within that
> structure; ie., a specific spinlock will be claimed before updating or accessing
> certain fields while a different spinlock will be claimed before updating or
> accessing certain _adjacent_ fields.
> 
> What is necessary and sufficient to prevent accidental false-sharing?
> The patch below was flagged as insufficient on ia64, and possibly ARM.

We expect native aligned scalar types to be accessed atomically (the
read/modify/write of a larger quantity that gcc does on some bitfield
cases has been flagged as a gcc bug, but shouldn't happen on normal
scalar types).

I am not 100% certain of "bool" here, I assume it's treated as a normal
scalar and thus atomic but if unsure, you can always use int.

Another option is to use the atomic bitops and make these bits in a
bitmask but that is probably unnecessary if you have locks already.

Cheers,
Ben.


> Regards,
> Peter Hurley
> 
> --- >% ---
> Subject: [PATCH 21/26] tty: Convert tty_struct bitfield to bools
> 
> The stopped, hw_stopped, flow_stopped and packet bits are smp-unsafe
> and interrupt-unsafe. For example,
> 
> CPU 0                         | CPU 1
>                               |
> tty->flow_stopped = 1         | tty->hw_stopped = 0
> 
> One of these updates will be corrupted, as the bitwise operation
> on the bitfield is non-atomic.
> 
> Ensure each flag has a separate memory location, so concurrent
> updates do not corrupt orthogonal states.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/tty.h | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/tty.h b/include/linux/tty.h
> index 1c3316a..7cf61cb 100644
> --- a/include/linux/tty.h
> +++ b/include/linux/tty.h
> @@ -261,7 +261,10 @@ struct tty_struct {
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  	int count;
>  	struct winsize winsize;		/* winsize_mutex */
> -	unsigned char stopped:1, hw_stopped:1, flow_stopped:1, packet:1;
> +	bool stopped;
> +	bool hw_stopped;
> +	bool flow_stopped;
> +	bool packet;
>  	unsigned char ctrl_status;	/* ctrl_lock */
>  	unsigned int receive_room;	/* Bytes free for queue */
>  	int flow_change;


--
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/