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: <20201201181736.GB27955@willie-the-truck>
Date:   Tue, 1 Dec 2020 18:17:37 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     "wangyanan (Y)" <wangyanan55@...wei.com>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@...il.com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>,
        Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>,
        wanghaibin.wang@...wei.com, yezengruan@...wei.com,
        zhukeqian1@...wei.com, yuzenghui@...wei.com,
        jiangkunkun@...wei.com, wangjingyi11@...wei.com,
        lushenming@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] KVM: arm64: Fix handling of merging tables into
 a block entry

On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 01:20:33AM +0800, wangyanan (Y) wrote:
> On 2020/12/1 22:35, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> 
> > Hi Yanan,
> > 
> > On 2020-12-01 14:11, wangyanan (Y) wrote:
> > > On 2020/12/1 21:46, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 10:30:41AM +0800, wangyanan (Y) wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > > > The point is at b.iii where the TLBI is not enough. There
> > > > > are many page
> > > > > mappings that we need to merge into a block mapping.
> > > > > 
> > > > > We invalidate the TLB for the input address without level
> > > > > hint at b.iii, but
> > > > > this operation just flush TLB for one page mapping, there
> > > > > 
> > > > > are still some TLB entries for the other page mappings in
> > > > > the cache, the MMU
> > > > > hardware walker can still hit these entries next time.
> > > > Ah, yes, I see. Thanks. I hadn't considered the case where there
> > > > are table
> > > > entries beneath the anchor. So how about the diff below?
> > > > 
> > > > Will
> > > > 
> > > > --->8
> > > 
> > > Hi, I think it's inappropriate to put the TLBI of all the leaf entries
> > > in function stage2_map_walk_table_post(),
> > > 
> > > because the *ptep must be an upper table entry when we enter
> > > stage2_map_walk_table_post().
> > > 
> > > We should make the TLBI for every leaf entry not table entry in the
> > > last lookup level,  just as I am proposing
> > > 
> > > to add the additional TLBI in function stage2_map_walk_leaf().
> > 
> > Could you make your concerns explicit? As far as I can tell, this should
> > address the bug you found, at least from a correctness perspective.
> > 
> > Are you worried about the impact of the full S2 invalidation? Or do you
> > see another correctness issue?
> 
> 
> Hi Will, Marc,
> 
> 
> After recheck of the diff, the full S2 invalidation in
> stage2_map_walk_table_post() should be well enough to solve this problem.
> 
> But I was wondering if we can add the full S2 invalidation in
> stage2_map_walk_table_pre(), where __kvm_tlb_flush_vmid() will be called for
> only one time.
> 
> If we add the full TLBI in stage2_map_walk_table_post(),
> __kvm_tlb_flush_vmid() might be called for many times in the loop and lots
> of (unnecessary) CPU instructions will be wasted.
> 
> What I'm saying is something like below, please let me know what do you
> think.
> 
> If this is OK, I can update the diff in v2 and send it with your SOB (is it
> appropriate?) after some tests.
> 
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> index b232bdd142a6..f11fb2996080 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c
> @@ -496,7 +496,7 @@ static int stage2_map_walk_table_pre(u64 addr, u64 end,
> u32 level,
>                 return 0;
> 
>         kvm_set_invalid_pte(ptep);
> -       kvm_call_hyp(__kvm_tlb_flush_vmid_ipa, data->mmu, addr, 0);
> +       kvm_call_hyp(__kvm_tlb_flush_vmid, data->mmu);
>         data->anchor = ptep;
>         return 0;

Yes, I think that's much better, but please add a comment! (you can
probably more-or-less copy the one I had in the post handler)

Will

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ