linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] um: asm/page.h: zero out a pte's high value in set_pte

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: <56AB2730.5020009@nod.at>
Date:	Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:47:44 +0100
From:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:	Nicolai Stange <nicstange@...il.com>
Cc:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	user-mode-linux-user@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] um: asm/page.h: zero out a pte's high value in
 set_pte_val()

Am 29.01.2016 um 02:32 schrieb Nicolai Stange:
> Richard Weinberger <richard@....at> writes:
> 
>> Am 29.01.2016 um 00:56 schrieb Nicolai Stange:
>>> Commit 16da306849d0 ("um: kill pfn_t")
>>> introduced a compile warning for defconfig:
>>>
>>>   arch/um/kernel/skas/mmu.c:38:206: warning: right shift count >= width of type
>>>                                     [-Wshift-count-overflow]
>>>
>>> Aforementioned patch changes the definition of the phys_to_pfn() macro from
>>>
>>>   ((pfn_t) ((p) >> PAGE_SHIFT))
>>>
>>> to
>>>
>>>   ((p) >> PAGE_SHIFT)
>>>
>>> This effectively changes the phys_to_pfn() expansion's type from
>>> unsigned long long to unsigned long.
>>>
>>> Through the callchain init_stub_pte()->mk_pte(), the expansion of
>>> phys_to_pfn() is (indirectly) fed into the 'phys' argument of the
>>> pte_set_val(pte, phys, prot) macro, eventually leading to
>>>
>>>   (pte).pte_high = (phys) >> 32;
>>>
>>> This results in the warning from above.
>>>
>>> Since UML only deals with 32 bit addresses, the upper 32 bits from 'phys'
>>> used to be zero anyway.
>>>
>>> Zero out the pte value's high part in pte_set_val() in order to get rid
>>> of the offending shift.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 16da306849d0 ("um: kill pfn_t")
>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/um/include/asm/page.h | 4 ++--
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/page.h b/arch/um/include/asm/page.h
>>> index e13d41c..61e235f 100644
>>> --- a/arch/um/include/asm/page.h
>>> +++ b/arch/um/include/asm/page.h
>>> @@ -46,8 +46,8 @@ typedef struct { unsigned long pgd; } pgd_t;
>>>  			      smp_wmb(); \
>>>  			      (to).pte_low = (from).pte_low; })
>>>  #define pte_is_zero(pte) (!((pte).pte_low & ~_PAGE_NEWPAGE) && !(pte).pte_high)
>>> -#define pte_set_val(pte, phys, prot) \
>>> -	({ (pte).pte_high = (phys) >> 32; \
>>> +#define pte_set_val(pte, phys, prot)				\
>>> +	({ (pte).pte_high = 0;					\
>>>  	   (pte).pte_low = (phys) | pgprot_val(prot); })
>>
>> I think we can completely kill .pte_high.
>>
> 
> I did a quick test with ->pte_high purged and this doesn't introduce any
> new warnings.
> 
> Booting w/o a rootfs works up to mount_root.
> 
> 
> Note that an implication of getting rid of ->pte_high would be that the
> type of pte_val() would get changed from unsigned long long to unsigned
> long. However, outside of arch/um, pte_val() is only used here:
> - drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vm.c
> - include/trace/events/xen.h
> - mm/gup.c
> - mm/memory.c
> All these uses and the ones in arch/um itself look compatible with this
> change (if relevant at all for UML).
> 
> 
> I'll post a follow up patch for this tomorrow.
> 
> Question 1: now that ->pte_high will be gone, do you want to have
>             ->pte_low renamed to e.g. ->pte_val?

So, with a freshly booted brain the story looks a bit different.
All this code needs a cleanup and we need to check what other archs do
before we change pte_val(). Are you ready for some research? :)

> Question 2: what is the smp_wmb() in pte_copy() paired with/good for?

AFACT to make sure that a write to pte_high is complete before we write pte_low.
100% copy&pasted from arch/i386 15 years ago. ;-)

Thanks,
//richard