linux-kernel - Re: [patch V6 12/37] x86/entry: Provide idtentry_entry/exit_cond

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: <20200520194242.GV2869@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date:   Wed, 20 May 2020 12:42:42 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
        Michael Kelley <mikelley@...rosoft.com>,
        Jason Chen CJ <jason.cj.chen@...el.com>,
        Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@...el.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V6 12/37] x86/entry: Provide
 idtentry_entry/exit_cond_rcu()

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 09:24:46PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> writes:
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 8:36 AM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> >     if (user_mode(regs)) {
> >         enter_from_user_mode();
> >     } else {
> >         if (!__rcu_is_watching()) {
> >             /*
> >              * If RCU is not watching then the same careful
> >              * sequence vs. lockdep and tracing is required.
> >              *
> >              * This only happens for IRQs that hit the idle loop, and
> >              * even that only happens if we aren't using the sane
> >              * MWAIT-while-IF=0 mode.
> >              */
> >             lockdep_hardirqs_off(CALLER_ADDR0);
> >             rcu_irq_enter();
> >             instrumentation_begin();
> >             trace_hardirqs_off_prepare();
> >             instrumentation_end();
> >             return true;
> >         } else {
> >             /*
> >              * If RCU is watching then the combo function
> >              * can be used.
> >              */
> >             instrumentation_begin();
> >             trace_hardirqs_off();
> >             rcu_tickle();
> >             instrumentation_end();
> >         }
> >     }
> >     return false;
> >
> > This is exactly what you have except that the cond_rcu part is gone
> > and I added rcu_tickle().
> >
> > Paul, the major change here is that if an IRQ hits normal kernel code
> > (i.e. code where RCU is watching and we're not in an EQS), the IRQ
> > won't call rcu_irq_enter() and rcu_irq_exit().  Instead it will call
> > rcu_tickle() on entry and nothing on exit.  Does that cover all the
> > bases?
> 
> Just chatted with Paul on IRC and he thinks this should work, but he's
> not sure whether it's actually sane :)

I will have more to say after coding it up.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul