linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] X86: add a generic API to let vdso code detect context switch

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: <20141210194152.GA14261@devbig257.prn2.facebook.com>
Date:	Wed, 10 Dec 2014 11:41:52 -0800
From:	Shaohua Li <shli@...com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, <kernel-team@...com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] X86: add a generic API to let vdso code detect
 context switch

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 11:11:27AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Shaohua Li <shli@...com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:38:41AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Shaohua Li <shli@...com> wrote:
> >> > vdso code can't disable preempt, so it can be preempted at any time.
> >> > This makes a challenge to implement specific features. This patch adds a
> >> > generic API to let vdso code detect context switch.
> >> >
> >> > With this patch, every cpu maintains a context switch count. The upper
> >> > bits of the count is the logical cpu id, so the count can't be identical
> >> > for any cpu. The low bits of the count will be increased for each
> >> > context switch. For a x86_64 cpu with 4096 cpus, the context switch will
> >> > be overflowed for 2^(64 - 12) context switch, which is a long time and can be
> >> > ignored. The change of the count in giving time can be used to detect if
> >> > context switch occurs.
> >>
> >> Why do you need those high bits?  I don't understand how you could
> >> possibly confuse one cpu's count with another's unless you fail to
> >> make sure that you're reading the same address both times.
> >>
> >> That being said, I don't like this patch.  I'm not sure I have a much
> >> better idea, though.  More thoughts in the 0/0 email to follow.
> > the vdso code doesn't disable preemption, so it can be migrated between
> > cpus at any time, the usage is:
> >
> > get_countext_switch_count (in cpu A)
> > do_something (in cpu B)
> > get_countext_switch_count (in cpu C)
> >
> > The cpu A, B, C could be completely different. We want to make sure
> > there is no preemption here and we use the context switch count to judge
> > this. If the high bits is ignored, the context switch count could be
> > identical even A != C, then our judgement using the switch count is
> > wrong.
> 
> Sure, but you could compare the cpu numbers, too.

Aha, makes sense.

Thanks,
Shaohua
--
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/