linux-kernel - Re: xen_exit

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:   Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:49:47 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: xen_exit_mmap() questions

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Boris Ostrovsky
<boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com> wrote:
> On 04/26/2017 04:52 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> I was trying to understand xen_drop_mm_ref() to update it for some
>> changes I'm working on, and I'm wondering whether we need
>> xen_exit_mmap() at all.
>>
>> AFAICS the intent is to force all CPUs to drop their lazy uses of the
>> mm being destroyed so it can be unpinned before tearing down the page
>> tables, thus making it faster to tear down the page tables.  This
>> seems like it'll speed up xen_set_pud() and xen_set_pmd(), but this
>> seems like it may be of rather limited value.
>
> Why do you think it's of limited value? Without it we will end up with a
> hypercall for each update.
>
> Or is your point that the number of those update is relatively small
> when we are tearing down?

The latter.  Also, unless I'm missing something, xen_set_pte() doesn't
have the optimization.  I haven't looked at exactly how page table
teardown works, but if it clears each PTE individually, then that's
the bulk of the work.

>
>
>>  Could we get away with
>> deleting it?
>>
>> Also, this code in drop_other_mm_ref() looks dubious to me:
>>
>>     /* If this cpu still has a stale cr3 reference, then make sure
>>        it has been flushed. */
>>     if (this_cpu_read(xen_current_cr3) == __pa(mm->pgd))
>>         load_cr3(swapper_pg_dir);
>>
>> If cr3 hasn't been flushed to the hypervisor because we're in a lazy
>> mode, why would load_cr3() help?  Shouldn't this be xen_mc_flush()
>> instead?
>
> load_cr3() actually ends with xen_mc_flush() by way of xen_write_cr3()
> -> xen_mc_issue().

xen_mc_issue() does:

        if ((paravirt_get_lazy_mode() & mode) == 0)
                xen_mc_flush();

I assume the load_cr3() is intended to deal with the case where we're
in lazy mode, but we'll still be in lazy mode, right?  Or does it
serve some other purpose?

--Andy