linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/mm: Fix incorrect for loop count calculation in sync_global

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: <20170501153110.GJ2649@x1>
Date:   Mon, 1 May 2017 23:31:10 +0800
From:   Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Yasuaki Ishimatsu <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>,
        Jinbum Park <jinb.park7@...il.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mm: Fix incorrect for loop count calculation in
 sync_global_pgds

On 05/01/17 at 08:24am, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On 05/01/17 at 07:40am, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 4:41 AM, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com> wrote:
> >> >  arch/x86/mm/init_64.c | 6 ++++--
> >> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> >> > index 15173d3..dbf4f00 100644
> >> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> >> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> >> > @@ -94,12 +94,14 @@ __setup("noexec32=", nonx32_setup);
> >> >   */
> >> >  void sync_global_pgds(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> >> >  {
> >> > -       unsigned long address;
> >> > +       unsigned long address, address_next;
> >> >
> >> > -       for (address = start; address <= end; address += PGDIR_SIZE) {
> >> > +       for (address = start; address <= end; address = address_next) {
> >> >                 const pgd_t *pgd_ref = pgd_offset_k(address);
> >> >                 struct page *page;
> >> >
> >> > +               address_next = (address & PGDIR_MASK) + PGDIR_SIZE;
> >> > +
> >>
> >> Let's change this to put the next address calculation in the for loop
> >> directly and use the ALIGN macro. Something like:
> >>
> >>  for (address = start; address <= end; address = ALIGN(address + 1, PGDIR_SIZE))
> >
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > Good idea!
> >
> > Do you think below change is OK for you? Taking out the initialization
> > can make the for loop line be shorter than 80 char.
> >
> 
> I would just wrap the "address = ALIGN(address + 1, PGDIR_SIZE)" if it
> doesn't fit.

OK, it's fine, will do wrapping.

> 
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> > index 15173d3..0840311 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> > @@ -94,12 +94,14 @@ __setup("noexec32=", nonx32_setup);
> >   */
> >  void sync_global_pgds(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> >  {
> > -       unsigned long address;
> > +       unsigned long address = start;
> >
> > -       for (address = start; address <= end; address += PGDIR_SIZE) {
> > +       for (; address <= end; address = ALIGN(address + 1, PGDIR_SIZE))
> > {
> >                 const pgd_t *pgd_ref = pgd_offset_k(address);
> >                 struct page *page;
> >
> > +               address_next = (address & PGDIR_MASK) + PGDIR_SIZE;
> > +
> 
> This gets deleted of course.

Sure, forget deleting it. while I am also testing on Jeff's system, that
code is right, otherwise compiling won't pass.

Will repost after the pgd crossing case seen and passed.

Thanks
Baoquan