linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] Rework READ

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, 24 Apr 2020 17:52:05 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] Rework READ_ONCE() to improve codegen

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 05:54:10PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 15:42, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 01:26:27PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 01:37:21PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > So I'm obviously all for these patches; do note however that it collides
> > > > most mighty with the KCSAN stuff, which I believe is still pending.
> > >
> > > That stuff has been pending for the last two releases afaict :/
> > >
> > > Anyway, I'm happy to either provide a branch with this series on, or do
> > > the merge myself, or send this again based on something else. What works
> > > best for you? The only thing I'd obviously like to avoid is tightly
> > > coupling this to KCSAN if there's a chance of it missing the merge window
> > > again.
> >
> > FWIW, I had a go at rebasing onto linux-next, just to get an idea for how
> > bad it is. It's fairly bad, and I don't think it's fair to inflict it on
> > sfr. I've included the interesting part of the resulting compiler.h below
> > for you and the KCSAN crowd to take a look at (yes, there's room for
> > subsequent cleanup, but I was focussing on the conflict resolution for now).
> 
> Thanks for the heads up. From what I can tell, your proposed change
> may work fine for KCSAN. However, I've had trouble compiling this:
> 
> 1. kcsan_disable_current() / kcsan_enable_current() do not work as-is,
> because READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE seems to be used from compilation units
> where the KCSAN runtime is not available (e.g.
> arch/x86/entry/vdso/Makefile which had to set KCSAN_SANITIZE := n for
> that reason).
> 2. Some new uaccess whitelist entries were needed.
> 
> I think this is what's needed:
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200424154730.190041-1-elver@google.com
> 
> With that you can change the calls to __kcsan_disable_current() /
> __kcsan_enable_current() for READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE(). After that,
> I was able to compile, and my test suite passed.

Brill, thanks Marco! I'll take a look at your other patches, but I'm pretty
stuck until we've figured out the merging plan for all of this.

Will