linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure on powerpc 8xx with 16k pages

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: <96fdc23c-ca08-6b6a-ebdd-23cedfada77d@csgroup.eu>
Date:   Thu, 4 Jun 2020 13:55:45 +0000
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure on powerpc 8xx with 16k pages



On 06/04/2020 11:17 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi, [+Peter]
> 
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:48:03AM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Using mpc885_ads_defconfig with CONFIG_PPC_16K_PAGES instead of
>> CONFIG_PPC_4K_PAGES, getting the following build failure:
>>
>>    CC      mm/gup.o
>> In file included from ./include/linux/kernel.h:11:0,
>>                   from mm/gup.c:2:
>> In function 'gup_hugepte.constprop',
>>      inlined from 'gup_huge_pd.isra.78' at mm/gup.c:2465:8:
>> ./include/linux/compiler.h:392:38: error: call to '__compiletime_assert_257'
>> declared with attribute error: Unsupported access size for
>> {READ,WRITE}_ONCE().
>>    _compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
>>                                        ^
>> ./include/linux/compiler.h:373:4: note: in definition of macro
>> '__compiletime_assert'
>>      prefix ## suffix();    \
>>      ^
>> ./include/linux/compiler.h:392:2: note: in expansion of macro
>> '_compiletime_assert'
>>    _compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
>>    ^
>> ./include/linux/compiler.h:405:2: note: in expansion of macro
>> 'compiletime_assert'
>>    compiletime_assert(__native_word(t) || sizeof(t) == sizeof(long long), \
>>    ^
>> ./include/linux/compiler.h:291:2: note: in expansion of macro
>> 'compiletime_assert_rwonce_type'
>>    compiletime_assert_rwonce_type(x);    \
>>    ^
>> mm/gup.c:2428:8: note: in expansion of macro 'READ_ONCE'
>>    pte = READ_ONCE(*ptep);
>>          ^
>> In function 'gup_get_pte',
>>      inlined from 'gup_pte_range' at mm/gup.c:2228:9,
>>      inlined from 'gup_pmd_range' at mm/gup.c:2613:15,
>>      inlined from 'gup_pud_range' at mm/gup.c:2641:15,
>>      inlined from 'gup_p4d_range' at mm/gup.c:2666:15,
>>      inlined from 'gup_pgd_range' at mm/gup.c:2694:15,
>>      inlined from 'internal_get_user_pages_fast' at mm/gup.c:2785:3:
> 
> At first glance, this looks like a real bug in the 16k page code -- you're
> loading the pte non-atomically on the fast GUP path and so you're prone to
> tearing, which probably isn't what you want. For a short-term hack, I'd
> suggest having CONFIG_HAVE_FAST_GUP depend on !CONFIG_PPC_16K_PAGES, but if
> you want to support this them you'll need to rework your pte_t so that it
> can be loaded atomically.

What do you mean by *rework* pte_t ?
pte are 32 bits words in size and are spread every 4 words in memory. 
Therefore pte_t has to be 128 bits because unlike huge_pte handling 
which always use huge_pte_offset() in loops, many many places in the 
kernel do pte++, so we need the pte type to be the size of the interval 
from one pte to the next one.

Christophe