linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] x86 spinlock: Fix memory corruption on completing completions

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 09 Feb 2015 22:33:50 +0530
From:	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC:	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
	peterz@...radead.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	konrad.wilk@...cle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, waiman.long@...com, davej@...hat.com,
	x86@...nel.org, jeremy@...p.org, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com,
	ak@...ux.intel.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, riel@...hat.com,
	borntraeger@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	a.ryabinin@...sung.com, sasha.levin@...cle.com,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] x86 spinlock: Fix memory corruption on completing
 completions

Ccing Davidlohr, (sorry that I got confused with similar address in cc
list).

On 02/09/2015 08:44 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/09, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>>
>> +static inline void __ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
>> +{
>> +	arch_spinlock_t old, new;
>> +	__ticket_t diff;
>> +
>> +	old.tickets = READ_ONCE(lock->tickets);
>> +	diff = (old.tickets.tail & ~TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG) - old.tickets.head;
>> +
>> +	/* try to clear slowpath flag when there are no contenders */
>> +	if ((old.tickets.tail & TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG) &&
>> +		(diff == TICKET_LOCK_INC)) {
>> +		new = old;
>> +		new.tickets.tail &= ~TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG;
>> +		cmpxchg(&lock->head_tail, old.head_tail, new.head_tail);
>> +	}
>> +}
>
> Can't we simplify it? We own .head, and we already know it. We only need
> to clear TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG in .tail atomically?
>
> IOW,
>
> 	static inline void __ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath(arch_spinlock_t *lock, __ticket_t head)
> 	{
> 		__ticket_t old_tail, new_tail;
>
> 		new_tail = head + TICKET_LOCK_INC;
> 		old_tail = new_tail | TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG;
>
> 		if (READ_ONCE(lock->tickets.tail) == old_tail)
> 			cmpxchg(&lock->tickets.tail, old_tail, new_tail);
> 	}
>
> Plus
>
> 	-	__ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath(lock);
> 	+	__ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath(lock, inc.tail);
>
> Or I missed something?

Thanks.. Perfect, 'll update with this change. (Jeremy had hinted
similar).

>
> And I think it would be better to avoid ifdef(CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS),
> ww can just do
>
> 	if (TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG)
> 		__ticket_check_and_clear_slowpath();
>

Okay.
While at it, I think current arch_spin_unlock() has similar structure
and wanted to clean it up. considering we define
TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG 0 or 1, I think compiler would be smart enough
to generate appropriate code and we could avoid #ifdef.

--
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/