[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200615215353.GH2514@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 23:53:53 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Frederic Barrat <fbarrat@...ux.ibm.com>,
Andrew Donnellan <ajd@...ux.ibm.com>,
Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Jacob Jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>,
Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
x86 <x86@...nel.org>, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
amd-gfx <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/12] x86/traps: Fix up invalid PASID
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 01:17:35PM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> Hi, Peter,
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 09:09:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 11:55:29AM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> >
> > > Or do you suggest to add a random new flag in struct thread_info instead
> > > of a TIF flag?
> >
> > Why thread_info? What's wrong with something simple like the below. It
> > takes a bit from the 'strictly current' flags word.
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> > index b62e6aaf28f0..fca830b97055 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> > @@ -801,6 +801,9 @@ struct task_struct {
> > /* Stalled due to lack of memory */
> > unsigned in_memstall:1;
> > #endif
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_PASID
> > + unsigned has_valid_pasid:1;
> > +#endif
> >
> > unsigned long atomic_flags; /* Flags requiring atomic access. */
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
> > index 142b23645d82..10b3891be99e 100644
> > --- a/kernel/fork.c
> > +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> > @@ -955,6 +955,10 @@ static struct task_struct *dup_task_struct(struct task_struct *orig, int node)
> > tsk->use_memdelay = 0;
> > #endif
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_PASID
> > + tsk->has_valid_pasid = 0;
> > +#endif
> > +
> > #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
> > tsk->active_memcg = NULL;
> > #endif
>
> The PASID MSR is x86 specific although PASID is PCIe concept and per-mm.
> Checking if the MSR has valid PASID (bit31=1) is an x86 specifc work.
> The flag should be cleared in cloned()/forked() and is only set and
> read in fixup() in x86 #GP for heuristic. It's not used anywhere outside
> of x86.
>
> That's why we think the flag should be in x86 struct thread_info instead
> of in generice struct task_struct.
I don't think anybody really cares, it's just one bit, we have plenty
left.
On x86_64 there's a u32 sized alignment hole in thread_info, also we
don't use the upper 32bit of thread_info::flags, however using those
would still mean you have to use atomic ops, which you really don't
need.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists