linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 20/20] powerpc/mm: Add speculative page fault

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: <ebe69178-2e8b-a5b9-6268-08b82f476021@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Aug 2017 12:28:46 +0530
From:   Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kirill@...temov.name,
        ak@...ux.intel.com, mhocko@...nel.org, dave@...olabs.net,
        jack@...e.cz, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        benh@...nel.crashing.org, mpe@...erman.id.au, paulus@...ba.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, hpa@...or.com,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        haren@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        npiggin@...il.com, bsingharora@...il.com,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 20/20] powerpc/mm: Add speculative page fault

On 08/18/2017 03:35 AM, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> This patch enable the speculative page fault on the PowerPC
> architecture.
> 
> This will try a speculative page fault without holding the mmap_sem,
> if it returns with WM_FAULT_RETRY, the mmap_sem is acquired and the

s/WM_FAULT_RETRY/VM_FAULT_RETRY/

> traditional page fault processing is done.
> 
> Support is only provide for BOOK3S_64 currently because:
> - require CONFIG_PPC_STD_MMU because checks done in
>   set_access_flags_filter()

What checks are done in set_access_flags_filter() ? We are just
adding the code block in do_page_fault().


> - require BOOK3S because we can't support for book3e_hugetlb_preload()
>   called by update_mmu_cache()
> 
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h |  5 +++++
>  arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c                      | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h
> index 818a58fc3f4f..897f8b9f67e6 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h
> @@ -313,6 +313,11 @@ extern unsigned long pci_io_base;
>  /* Advertise support for _PAGE_SPECIAL */
>  #define __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SPECIAL
>  
> +/* Advertise that we call the Speculative Page Fault handler */
> +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64)
> +#define __HAVE_ARCH_CALL_SPF
> +#endif
> +
>  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>  
>  /*
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
> index 4c422632047b..7b3cc4c30eab 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
> @@ -291,9 +291,36 @@ int do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long address,
>  	if (is_write && is_user)
>  		store_update_sp = store_updates_sp(regs);
>  
> -	if (is_user)
> +	if (is_user) {
>  		flags |= FAULT_FLAG_USER;
>  
> +#if defined(__HAVE_ARCH_CALL_SPF)
> +		/* let's try a speculative page fault without grabbing the
> +		 * mmap_sem.
> +		 */
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * flags is set later based on the VMA's flags, for the common
> +		 * speculative service, we need some flags to be set.
> +		 */
> +		if (is_write)
> +			flags |= FAULT_FLAG_WRITE;
> +
> +		fault = handle_speculative_fault(mm, address, flags);
> +		if (!(fault & VM_FAULT_RETRY || fault & VM_FAULT_ERROR)) {
> +			perf_sw_event(PERF_COUNT_SW_SPF_DONE, 1,
> +				      regs, address);
> +			goto done;

Why we should retry with classical page fault on VM_FAULT_ERROR ?
We should always return VM_FAULT_RETRY in case there is a clear
collision some where which requires retry with classical method
and return VM_FAULT_ERROR in cases where we know that it cannot
be retried and fail for good. Should not handle_speculative_fault()
be changed to accommodate this ?

> +		}
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Resetting flags since the following code assumes
> +		 * FAULT_FLAG_WRITE is not set.
> +		 */
> +		flags &= ~FAULT_FLAG_WRITE;
> +#endif /* defined(__HAVE_ARCH_CALL_SPF) */

Setting and resetting of FAULT_FLAG_WRITE seems confusing. Why you
say that some flags need to be set for handle_speculative_fault()
function. Could you elaborate on this ?