linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] powerpc/powernv: hold device_hotplug_lock when calling memtrace_offline

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: <20180925121504.GH8537@350D>
Date:   Tue, 25 Sep 2018 22:15:04 +1000
From:   Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
        devel@...uxdriverproject.org,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Rashmica Gupta <rashmica.g@...il.com>,
        Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] powerpc/powernv: hold device_hotplug_lock when
 calling memtrace_offline_pages()

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:14:56AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> Let's perform all checking + offlining + removing under
> device_hotplug_lock, so nobody can mess with these devices via
> sysfs concurrently.
> 
> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
> Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
> Cc: Rashmica Gupta <rashmica.g@...il.com>
> Cc: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
> Cc: Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>
> Reviewed-by: Pavel Tatashin <pavel.tatashin@...rosoft.com>
> Reviewed-by: Rashmica Gupta <rashmica.g@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/memtrace.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/memtrace.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/memtrace.c
> index fdd48f1a39f7..d84d09c56af9 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/memtrace.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/memtrace.c
> @@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ static int change_memblock_state(struct memory_block *mem, void *arg)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +/* called with device_hotplug_lock held */
>  static bool memtrace_offline_pages(u32 nid, u64 start_pfn, u64 nr_pages)
>  {
>  	u64 end_pfn = start_pfn + nr_pages - 1;
> @@ -111,6 +112,7 @@ static u64 memtrace_alloc_node(u32 nid, u64 size)
>  	end_pfn = round_down(end_pfn - nr_pages, nr_pages);
>  
>  	for (base_pfn = end_pfn; base_pfn > start_pfn; base_pfn -= nr_pages) {
> +		lock_device_hotplug();

Why not grab the lock before the for loop? That way we can avoid bad cases like a
large node being scanned for a small number of pages (nr_pages). Ideally we need
a cond_resched() in the loop, but I guess offline_pages() has one.

Acked-by: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>