linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] dax: Fix race between colliding PMD & PTE entries

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 22 May 2017 13:44:55 -0600
From:   Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Pawel Lebioda <pawel.lebioda@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Xiong Zhou <xzhou@...hat.com>, Eryu Guan <eguan@...hat.com>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dax: Fix race between colliding PMD & PTE entries

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 04:37:48PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 18-05-17 15:29:39, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 09:50:37AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > On Wed 17-05-17 11:16:39, Ross Zwisler wrote:
<>
> > > The first scenario seems to be possible. dax_iomap_pmd_fault() will create
> > > PMD entry in the radix tree. Then dax_iomap_pte_fault() will come, do
> > > grab_mapping_entry(), there it sees entry is PMD but we are doing PTE fault
> > > so I'd think that pmd_downgrade = true... But actually the condition there
> > > doesn't trigger in this case. And that's a catch that although we asked
> > > grab_mapping_entry() for PTE, we've got PMD back and that screws us later.
> > 
> > Yep, it was a concious decision when implementing the PMD support to allow one
> > thread to use PMDs and another to use PTEs in the same range, as long as the
> > thread faulting in PMDs is the first to insert into the radix tree.  A PMD
> > radix tree entry will be inserted and used for locking and dirty tracking, and
> > each thread or process can fault in either PTEs or PMDs into its own address
> > space as needed.
> 
> Well, for *threads* it doesn't really make good sense to mix PMDs and PTEs
> as they share page tables. However for *processes* it makes some sense to
> allow one process to use PTEs and another process to use PMDs. And I
> remember we were discussing this in the past.

Ugh, I was super sloppy with my use of "thread" and "process" in my previous
email.  Sorry, and thanks for the clarifications.  I think we're on the same
page, even if I had trouble articulating it. :)

> So normal fault path uses alloc_set_pte() for installing new PTE. And that
> uses pte_alloc_one_map() which checks whether PMD is still suitable for
> inserting a PTE. If not, we return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE. Probably it would be
> cleanest to factor our common parts of PTE and PMD insertion so that we can
> use these functions both from DAX and generic fault paths.

Makes sense, thanks.