linux-kernel - Re: [RFC, PATCHv1 24/28] x86/mm: add sync_global_pgds() for configuration with 5-level paging

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]

Date:   Thu, 8 Dec 2016 22:33:24 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCHv1 24/28] x86/mm: add sync_global_pgds() for
 configuration with 5-level paging

On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 10:42:19AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
> <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > This basically restores slightly modified version of original
> > sync_global_pgds() which we had before foldedl p4d was introduced.
> >
> > The only modification is protection against 'address' overflow.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/mm/init_64.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 47 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> > index a991f5c4c2c4..d637893ac8c2 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> > @@ -92,6 +92,52 @@ __setup("noexec32=", nonx32_setup);
> >   * When memory was added/removed make sure all the processes MM have
> >   * suitable PGD entries in the local PGD level page.
> >   */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_5LEVEL
> > +void sync_global_pgds(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, int removed)
> > +{
> > +        unsigned long address;
> > +
> > +       for (address = start; address <= end && address >= start;
> > +                       address += PGDIR_SIZE) {
> > +                const pgd_t *pgd_ref = pgd_offset_k(address);
> > +                struct page *page;
> > +
> > +                /*
> > +                 * When it is called after memory hot remove, pgd_none()
> > +                 * returns true. In this case (removed == 1), we must clear
> > +                 * the PGD entries in the local PGD level page.
> > +                 */
> > +                if (pgd_none(*pgd_ref) && !removed)
> > +                        continue;
> 
> This isn't quite specific to your patch, but can we assert that, if
> removed=1, then we're not operating on the vmalloc range?  Because if
> we do, this will be racy is nasty ways.

Looks like there's no users of removed=1. The last user is gone with
af2cf278ef4f ("x86/mm/hotplug: Don't remove PGD entries in
remove_pagetable()")

I'll just drop it (with separate patch).

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov