linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] random kernel crashes after THP rework on s390 (maybe also on PowerPC and ARM)

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

Message-ID: <20160223103221.GA1418@node.shutemov.name>
Date:	Tue, 23 Feb 2016 13:32:21 +0300
From:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To:	Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] random kernel crashes after THP rework on s390 (maybe also
 on PowerPC and ARM)

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 06:16:40PM +0100, Gerald Schaefer wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 16:57:27 +0100
> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > > I'm also confused by pmd_none() is equal to !pmd_present() on s390. Hm?
> > 
> > Don't know, Gerald or Martin?
> 
> The implementation frequently changes depending on how many new bits Martin
> needs to squeeze out :-)
> We don't have a _PAGE_PRESENT bit for pmds, so pmd_present() just checks if the
> entry is not empty. pmd_none() of course does the opposite, it checks if it is
> empty.

I still worry about pmd_present(). It looks wrong to me. I wounder if
patch below makes a difference.

The theory is that the splitting bit effetely masked bogus pmd_present():
we had pmd_trans_splitting() in all code path and that prevented mm from
touching the pmd. Once pmd_trans_splitting() has gone, mm proceed with the
pmd where it shouldn't and here's a boom.

I'm not sure that the patch is correct wrt yound/old pmds and I have no
way to test it...

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h
index 64ead8091248..2eeb17ab68ac 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/pgtable.h
@@ -490,7 +490,7 @@ static inline int pud_bad(pud_t pud)
 
 static inline int pmd_present(pmd_t pmd)
 {
-	return pmd_val(pmd) != _SEGMENT_ENTRY_INVALID;
+	return !(pmd_val(pmd) & _SEGMENT_ENTRY_INVALID);
 }
 
 static inline int pmd_none(pmd_t pmd)
-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov