linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Synchronize encl->srcu in sgx_encl

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: <op.0vogfzwvwjvjmi@fgctuval.land.test>
Date:   Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:34:37 -0600
From:   "Haitao Huang" <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Sean Christopherson" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org, "Borislav Petkov" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Synchronize encl->srcu in sgx_encl_release().

On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 23:59:55 -0600, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 07:56:01AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:01:32AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>> > > Each sgx_mmun_notifier_release() starts a grace period, which means  
>> that
>> >
>> > Should be sgx_mmu_notifier_release(), here and in the comment.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> > > one extra synchronize_rcu() in sgx_encl_release(). Add it there.
>> > >
>> > > sgx_release() has the loop that drains the list but with bad luck  
>> the
>> > > entry is already gone from the list before that loop processes it.
>> >
>> > Why not include the actual analysis that "proves" the bug?  The splat  
>> that
>> > Haitao reported would also be useful info.
>>
>> True. I can include a snippet of dmesg to the commit message.
>>
>> > > Fixes: 1728ab54b4be ("x86/sgx: Add a page reclaimer")
>> > > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
>> > > Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
>> > > Reported-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
>> >
>> > Haitao reported the bug, and for all intents and purposes provided  
>> the fix.  I
>> > just did the analysis to verify that there was a legitimate bug and  
>> that the
>> > synchronization in sgx_encl_release() was indeed necessary.
>>
>> Good and valid point. The way I see it, the tags should be:
>>
>> Reported-by: Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>
>> Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
>>
>> Haitao pointed out the bug but from your analysis I could resolve that
>> this is the fix to implement, and was able to write the long
>> description for the commit.
>>
>> Does this make sense to you?
>
> I'm sending v2 next week (this week on vacation).
>
> /Jarkko

I don't mind either how tags are assigned. But our testing reveals
significant latency introduced in scenarios of heavy loading/unloading
enclaves. synchronize_srcu_expedited fixed the issue. Please analyze and
confirm if that's more appropriate than synchronize_srcu here.