linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: fix a addressing exception caused by huge_pte

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c47402fe-b873-2e52-52be-7f9cc9eef0a1@oracle.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Mar 2020 12:47:05 -0700
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     "Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.)" 
        <longpeng2@...wei.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        arei.gonglei@...wei.com, weidong.huang@...wei.com,
        weifuqiang@...wei.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: fix a addressing exception caused by
 huge_pte_offset()

On 3/24/20 10:59 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 09:19:29AM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>> On 3/24/20 8:55 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 08:25:09AM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>>>> On 3/24/20 4:55 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>>>> Also, since CH moved all the get_user_pages_fast code out of the
>>>>> arch's many/all archs can drop their arch specific version of this
>>>>> routine. This is really just a specialized version of gup_fast's
>>>>> algorithm..
>>>>>
>>>>> (also the arch versions seem different, why do some return actual
>>>>>  ptes, not null?)
>>>>
>>>> Not sure I understand that last question.  The return value should be
>>>> a *pte or null.
>>>
>>> I mean the common code ends like this:
>>>
>>> 	pmd = pmd_offset(pud, addr);
>>> 	if (sz != PMD_SIZE && pmd_none(*pmd))
>>> 		return NULL;
>>> 	/* hugepage or swap? */
>>> 	if (pmd_huge(*pmd) || !pmd_present(*pmd))
>>> 		return (pte_t *)pmd;
>>>
>>> 	return NULL;
>>>
>>> So it always returns a pointer into a PUD or PMD, while say, ppc
>>> in __find_linux_pte() ends like:
>>>
>>> 	return pte_offset_kernel(&pmd, ea);
>>>
>>> Which is pointing to a PTE
>>
>> Ok, now I understand the question.  huge_pte_offset will/should only be
>> called for addresses that are in a vma backed by hugetlb pages.  So,
>> pte_offset_kernel() will only return page table type (PUD/PMD/etc) associated
>> with a huge page supported by the particular arch.
> 
> I thought pte_offset_kernel always returns PTEs (ie the 4k entries on
> x86), I suppose what you are saying is that since the caller knows
> this is always a PUD or PMD due to the VMA the pte_offset is dead code.

Yes, for x86 the address will correspond to a PUD or PMD or NULL.  For huge
page mappings/vmas on x86, there are no corresponding PTEs.
-- 
Mike Kravetz