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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 9 May 2020 18:11:57 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, rjw@...ysocki.net, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] mm: Get rid of vmalloc_sync_(un)mappings() On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 11:25:16AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 11:34:07PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 09:20:00PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > The only concern I have is the pgd_lock lock hold times. > > > > > > By not doing on-demand faults anymore, and consistently calling > > > sync_global_*(), we iterate that pgd_list thing much more often than > > > before if I'm not mistaken. > > > > Should not be a problem, from what I have seen this function is not > > called often on x86-64. The vmalloc area needs to be synchronized at > > the top-level there, which is by now P4D (with 4-level paging). And the > > vmalloc area takes 64 entries, when all of them are populated the > > function will not be called again. > > Right; it's just that the moment you do trigger it, it'll iterate that > pgd_list and that is potentially huge. Then again, that's not a new > problem. > > I suppose we can deal with it if/when it becomes an actual problem. > > I had a quick look and I think it might be possible to make it an RCU > managed list. We'd have to remove the pgd_list entry in > put_task_struct_rcu_user(). Then we can play games in sync_global_*() > and use RCU iteration. New tasks (which can be missed in the RCU > iteration) will already have a full clone of the PGD anyway. One of the things on my long-term todo list is to replace mm_struct.mmlist with an XArray containing all mm_structs. Then we can use one mark to indicate maybe-swapped and another mark to indicate ... whatever it is pgd_list indicates. Iterating an XArray (whether the entire thing or with marks) is RCU-safe and faster than iterating a linked list, so this should solve the problem?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists