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  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:	Mon, 27 Oct 2014 07:50:41 +1100
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, steve.capper@...aro.org,
	aarcange@...hat.com, mpe@...erman.id.au, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, hannes@...xchg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] mm: Update generic gup implementation to handle
 hugepage directory

On Fri, 2014-10-24 at 09:22 -0700, James Bottomley wrote:

> Parisc does this.  As soon as one CPU issues a TLB purge, it's broadcast
> to all the CPUs on the inter-CPU bus.  The next instruction isn't
> executed until they respond.
> 
> But this is only for our CPU TLB.  There's no other external
> consequence, so removal from the page tables isn't effected by this TLB
> flush, therefore the theory on which Dave bases the change to
> atomic_add() should work for us (of course, atomic_add is lock add
> unlock on our CPU, so it's not going to be of much benefit).

I'm not sure I follow you here.

Do you or do you now perform an IPI to do TLB flushes ? If you don't
(for example because you have HW broadcast), then you need the
speculative get_page(). If you do (and can read a PTE atomically), you
can get away with atomic_add().

The reason is that if you remember how zap_pte_range works, we perform
the flush before we get rid of the page.

So if your using IPIs for the flush, the fact that gup_fast has
interrupts disabled will delay the IPI response and thus effectively
prevent the pages from being actually freed, allowing us to simply do
the atomic_add() on x86.

But if we don't use IPIs because we have HW broadcast of TLB
invalidations, then we don't have that synchronization. atomic_add won't
work, we need get_page_speculative() because the page could be
concurrently being freed.

Cheers,
Ben.

> James
> 
> > Another option would be to make the generic code use something defined
> > by the arch to decide whether to use speculative get or
> > not. I like the idea of keeping the bulk of that code generic...
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Ben.
> > 
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> > > the body to majordomo@...ck.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
> > > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> > > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@...ck.org"> email@...ck.org </a>
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> > the body to majordomo@...ck.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
> > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@...ck.org"> email@...ck.org </a>
> > 
> 
> 
> --
> 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/


--
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