linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 14/20] mm: Provide speculative fault infrastructure

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: <1504041570.2358.30.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
Date:   Wed, 30 Aug 2017 07:19:30 +1000
From:   Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        ak@...ux.intel.com, mhocko@...nel.org, dave@...olabs.net,
        jack@...e.cz, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.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>,
        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 14/20] mm: Provide speculative fault infrastructure

On Tue, 2017-08-29 at 13:27 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> mpe helped me out and explained that is the PWC hint to TBLIE.
> 
> So, you set need_flush_all when you unhook pud/pmd/pte which you then
> use to set PWC. So free_pgtables() will do the PWC when it unhooks
> higher level pages.
> 
> But you're right that there's some issues, free_pgtables() itself
> doesn't seem to use mm->page_table_lock,pmd->lock _AT_ALL_ to unhook the
> pages.
> 
> If it were to do that, things should work fine since those locks would
> then serialize against the speculative faults, we would never install a
> page if the VMA would be under tear-down and it would thus not be
> visible to your caches either.

That's one case. I don't remember of *all* the cases to be honest, but
I do remember several times over the past few years thinking "ah we are
fine because the mm sem taken for writing protects us from any
concurrent tree structure change" :-)

Cheers,
Ben.