linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 11/21] mm: pagewalk: Add p4d_entry() and pgd

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: <60ee20ef-62a3-5df1-6e24-24973b69be70@arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:53:04 +0100
From:   Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 11/21] mm: pagewalk: Add p4d_entry() and pgd_entry()

On 23/07/2019 11:14, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 04:42:00PM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
>> pgd_entry() and pud_entry() were removed by commit 0b1fbfe50006c410
>> ("mm/pagewalk: remove pgd_entry() and pud_entry()") because there were
>> no users. We're about to add users so reintroduce them, along with
>> p4d_entry() as we now have 5 levels of tables.
>>
>> Note that commit a00cc7d9dd93d66a ("mm, x86: add support for
>> PUD-sized transparent hugepages") already re-added pud_entry() but with
>> different semantics to the other callbacks. Since there have never
>> been upstream users of this, revert the semantics back to match the
>> other callbacks. This means pud_entry() is called for all entries, not
>> just transparent huge pages.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
>> ---
>>  include/linux/mm.h | 15 +++++++++------
>>  mm/pagewalk.c      | 27 ++++++++++++++++-----------
>>  2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
>> index 0334ca97c584..b22799129128 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
>> @@ -1432,15 +1432,14 @@ void unmap_vmas(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *start_vma,
>>  
>>  /**
>>   * mm_walk - callbacks for walk_page_range
>> - * @pud_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PUD (2nd-level) entry
>> - *	       this handler should only handle pud_trans_huge() puds.
>> - *	       the pmd_entry or pte_entry callbacks will be used for
>> - *	       regular PUDs.
>> - * @pmd_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PMD (3rd-level) entry
>> + * @pgd_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PGD (top-level) entry
>> + * @p4d_entry: if set, called for each non-empty P4D entry
>> + * @pud_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PUD entry
>> + * @pmd_entry: if set, called for each non-empty PMD entry
> 
> How are these expected to work with folding?
> 
> For example, on arm64 with 64K pages and 42-bit VA, you can have 2-level
> tables where the PGD is P4D, PUD, and PMD. IIUC we'd invoke the
> callbacks for each of those levels where we found an entry in the pgd.
> 
> Either the callee handle that, or we should inhibit the callbacks when
> levels are folded, and I think that needs to be explcitly stated either
> way.
> 
> IIRC on x86 the p4d folding is dynamic depending on whether the HW
> supports 5-level page tables. Maybe that implies the callee has to
> handle that.

Yes, my assumption is that it has to be up to the callee to handle that
because folding can be dynamic. I believe this also was how these
callbacks work before they were removed. However I'll add a comment
explaining that here as it's probably non-obvious.

Steve