linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/hyperv: Disable preemption while setting reenlightenment vector

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:   Fri, 14 Jun 2019 15:28:37 +0100
From:   Dmitry Safonov <dima@...sta.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Prasanna Panchamukhi <panchamukhi@...sta.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Cathy Avery <cavery@...hat.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
        "Michael Kelley (EOSG)" <Michael.H.Kelley@...rosoft.com>,
        Mohammed Gamal <mmorsy@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Roman Kagan <rkagan@...tuozzo.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        devel@...uxdriverproject.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/hyperv: Disable preemption while setting
 reenlightenment vector



On 6/14/19 1:27 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:50:51PM +0100, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
>> On 6/14/19 11:08 AM, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>>> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> @@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ void set_hv_tscchange_cb(void (*cb)(void))
>>>>  	struct hv_reenlightenment_control re_ctrl = {
>>>>  		.vector = HYPERV_REENLIGHTENMENT_VECTOR,
>>>>  		.enabled = 1,
>>>> -		.target_vp = hv_vp_index[smp_processor_id()]
>>>> +		.target_vp = hv_vp_index[raw_smp_processor_id()]
>>>>  	};
>>>>  	struct hv_tsc_emulation_control emu_ctrl = {.enabled = 1};
>>>>  
>>>
>>> Yes, this should do, thanks! I'd also suggest to leave a comment like
>>> 	/* 
>>>          * This function can get preemted and migrate to a different CPU
>>> 	 * but this doesn't matter. We just need to assign
>>> 	 * reenlightenment notification to some online CPU. In case this
>>>          * CPU goes offline, hv_cpu_die() will re-assign it to some
>>>  	 * other online CPU.
>>> 	 */
>>
>> What if the cpu goes down just before wrmsrl()?
>> I mean, hv_cpu_die() will reassign another cpu, but this thread will be
>> resumed on some other cpu and will write cpu number which is at that
>> moment already down?
>>
>> (probably I miss something)
>>
>> And I presume it's guaranteed that during hv_cpu_die() no other cpu may
>> go down:
>> :	new_cpu = cpumask_any_but(cpu_online_mask, cpu);
>> :	re_ctrl.target_vp = hv_vp_index[new_cpu];
>> :	wrmsrl(HV_X64_MSR_REENLIGHTENMENT_CONTROL, *((u64 *)&re_ctrl));
> 
> Then cpus_read_lock() is the right interface, not preempt_disable().
> 
> I know you probably can't change the HV interface, but I'm thinking its
> rather daft you have to specify a CPU at all for this. The HV can just
> pick one and send the notification there, who cares.

Heh, I thought cpus_read_lock() is more "internal" api and
preempt_diable() is prefered ;-)

Will send v2 with the suggested comment and cpus_read_lock().

-- 
          Dima