[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXfCbajLhUixKNaMfFw91gzoQzt__faYLwyBqA3eAbQVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 14:24:09 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/vmalloc: Sync unmappings in vunmap_page_range()
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 12:14 AM Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org> wrote:
>
> From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
>
> On x86-32 with PTI enabled, parts of the kernel page-tables
> are not shared between processes. This can cause mappings in
> the vmalloc/ioremap area to persist in some page-tables
> after the regions is unmapped and released.
>
> When the region is re-used the processes with the old
> mappings do not fault in the new mappings but still access
> the old ones.
>
> This causes undefined behavior, in reality often data
> corruption, kernel oopses and panics and even spontaneous
> reboots.
>
> Fix this problem by activly syncing unmaps in the
> vmalloc/ioremap area to all page-tables in the system.
>
> References: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1118689
> Fixes: 5d72b4fba40ef ('x86, mm: support huge I/O mapping capability I/F')
> Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
> ---
> mm/vmalloc.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> index 4fa8d84599b0..322b11a374fd 100644
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -132,6 +132,8 @@ static void vunmap_page_range(unsigned long addr, unsigned long end)
> continue;
> vunmap_p4d_range(pgd, addr, next);
> } while (pgd++, addr = next, addr != end);
> +
> + vmalloc_sync_all();
> }
I'm confused. Shouldn't the code in _vm_unmap_aliases handle this?
As it stands, won't your patch hurt performance on x86_64? If x86_32
is a special snowflake here, maybe flush_tlb_kernel_range() should
handle this?
Even if your patch is correct, a comment would be nice
Powered by blists - more mailing lists