[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <F33D2DD9-97D5-44A0-890B-35FE686E36DC@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:29:51 -0800
From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@...eaurora.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, surenb@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/userfaultfd: fix memory corruption due to writeprotect
> On Jan 12, 2021, at 1:43 PM, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 12:38:34PM -0800, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>> On Jan 12, 2021, at 11:56 AM, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 11:15:43AM -0800, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>>> I will send an RFC soon for per-table deferred TLB flushes tracking.
>>>> The basic idea is to save a generation in the page-struct that tracks
>>>> when deferred PTE change took place, and track whenever a TLB flush
>>>> completed. In addition, other users - such as mprotect - would use
>>>> the tlb_gather interface.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, due to limited space in page-struct this would only
>>>> be possible for 64-bit (and my implementation is only for x86-64).
>>>
>>> I don't want to discourage you but I don't think this would end up
>>> well. PPC doesn't necessarily follow one-page-struct-per-table rule,
>>> and I've run into problems with this before while trying to do
>>> something similar.
>>
>> Discourage, discourage. Better now than later.
>>
>> It will be relatively easy to extend the scheme to be per-VMA instead of
>> per-table for architectures that prefer it this way. It does require
>> TLB-generation tracking though, which Andy only implemented for x86, so I
>> will focus on x86-64 right now.
>
> Can you remind me of what we're missing on arm64 in this area, please? I'm
> happy to help get this up and running once you have something I can build
> on.
Let me first finish making something that we can use as a basis for a
discussion. I do not waste your time before I have something ready.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists