linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] arm64:change jump_label to use branch instruction, not use NOP instr

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: <20150731101432.GA29497@arm.com>
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 2015 11:14:32 +0100
From:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@...il.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"anton@...ba.org" <anton@...ba.org>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"jbaron@...mai.com" <jbaron@...mai.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] arm64:change jump_label to use branch instruction, not use
 NOP instr

On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 10:33:55AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 05:25:02PM +0800, yalin wang wrote:
> > > On Jul 31, 2015, at 15:52, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 03:41:37PM +0800, yalin wang wrote:
> > >> This change a little arch_static_branch(), use b . + 4 for false
> > >> return, why? According to aarch64 TRM, if both source and dest
> > >> instr are branch instr, can patch the instr directly, don't need
> > >> all cpu to do ISB for sync, this means we can call
> > >> aarch64_insn_patch_text_nosync() during patch_text(),
> > >> will improve the performance when change a static_key.
> > > 
> > > This doesn't parse.. What?
> > > 
> > > Also, this conflicts with the jump label patches I've got.
> > 
> > this is arch depend , you can see aarch64_insn_patch_text( ) for more info,
> > if aarch64_insn_hotpatch_safe() is true, will patch the text directly.
> 
> So I patched all arches, including aargh64.
> 
> > what is your git branch base? i make the patch based on linux-next branch,
> > maybe a little delay than yours , could you share your branch git address?
> > i can make a new based on yours .
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/peterz/queue.git/log/?h=locking/jump_label
> 
> Don't actually use that branch for anything permanent, this is throw-away
> git stuff.
> 
> But you're replacing a NOP with an unconditional branch to the next
> instruction? I suppose I'll leave that to Will and co.. I just had
> trouble understanding your Changelog -- also I was very much not awake
> yet.

Optimising the (hopefully rare) patching operation but having a potential
impact on the runtime code (assumedly a hotpath) seems completely backwards
to me.

Yalin, do you have a reason for this change or did you just notice that
paragraph in the architecture and decide to apply it here?

Even then, I think there are technical issues with the proposal, since
we could get spurious execution of the old code without explicit
synchronisation (see the kick_all_cpus_sync() call in
aarch64_insn_patch_text).

Will
--
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/