linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64: mm: enable per pmd page table lock

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]

Date:   Mon, 11 Mar 2019 12:12:28 +0000
From:   Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:     Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
        Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Nick Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Chintan Pandya <cpandya@...eaurora.org>,
        Jun Yao <yaojun8558363@...il.com>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64: mm: enable per pmd page table lock

Hi,

On Sat, Mar 09, 2019 at 06:19:06PM -0700, Yu Zhao wrote:
> Switch from per mm_struct to per pmd page table lock by enabling
> ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK. This provides better granularity for
> large system.
> 
> I'm not sure if there is contention on mm->page_table_lock. Given
> the option comes at no cost (apart from initializing more spin
> locks), why not enable it now.
> 
> We only do so when pmd is not folded, so we don't mistakenly call
> pgtable_pmd_page_ctor() on pud or p4d in pgd_pgtable_alloc(). (We
> check shift against PMD_SHIFT, which is same as PUD_SHIFT when pmd
> is folded).

Just to check, I take it pgtable_pmd_page_ctor() is now a NOP when the
PMD is folded, and this last paragraph is stale?

> Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig               |  3 +++
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgalloc.h | 12 +++++++++++-
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h     |  5 ++++-
>  3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> index cfbf307d6dc4..a3b1b789f766 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> @@ -872,6 +872,9 @@ config ARCH_WANT_HUGE_PMD_SHARE
>  config ARCH_HAS_CACHE_LINE_SIZE
>  	def_bool y
>  
> +config ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK
> +	def_bool y if PGTABLE_LEVELS > 2
> +
>  config SECCOMP
>  	bool "Enable seccomp to safely compute untrusted bytecode"
>  	---help---
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgalloc.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgalloc.h
> index 52fa47c73bf0..dabba4b2c61f 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgalloc.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgalloc.h
> @@ -33,12 +33,22 @@
>  
>  static inline pmd_t *pmd_alloc_one(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr)
>  {
> -	return (pmd_t *)__get_free_page(PGALLOC_GFP);
> +	struct page *page;
> +
> +	page = alloc_page(PGALLOC_GFP);
> +	if (!page)
> +		return NULL;
> +	if (!pgtable_pmd_page_ctor(page)) {
> +		__free_page(page);
> +		return NULL;
> +	}
> +	return page_address(page);
>  }
>  
>  static inline void pmd_free(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmdp)
>  {
>  	BUG_ON((unsigned long)pmdp & (PAGE_SIZE-1));
> +	pgtable_pmd_page_dtor(virt_to_page(pmdp));
>  	free_page((unsigned long)pmdp);
>  }

It looks like arm64's existing stage-2 code is inconsistent across
alloc/free, and IIUC this change might turn that into a real problem.
Currently we allocate all levels of stage-2 table with
__get_free_page(), but free them with p?d_free(). We always miss the
ctor and always use the dtor.

Other than that, this patch looks fine to me, but I'd feel more
comfortable if we could first fix the stage-2 code to free those stage-2
tables without invoking the dtor.

Anshuman, IIRC you had a patch to fix the stage-2 code to not invoke the
dtors. If so, could you please post that so that we could take it as a
preparatory patch for this series?

Thanks,
Mark.

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h
> index 106fdc951b6e..4e3becfed387 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h
> @@ -62,7 +62,10 @@ static inline void __pte_free_tlb(struct mmu_gather *tlb, pgtable_t pte,
>  static inline void __pmd_free_tlb(struct mmu_gather *tlb, pmd_t *pmdp,
>  				  unsigned long addr)
>  {
> -	tlb_remove_table(tlb, virt_to_page(pmdp));
> +	struct page *page = virt_to_page(pmdp);
> +
> +	pgtable_pmd_page_dtor(page);
> +	tlb_remove_table(tlb, page);
>  }
>  #endif
>  
> -- 
> 2.21.0.360.g471c308f928-goog
>