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: <5824b731-ca6a-92fd-e314-d986b6a7b101@shipmail.org>
Date:   Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:06:53 +0100
From:   Thomas Hellström (Intel) 
        <thomas_os@...pmail.org>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc:     dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@....com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mm,drm/ttm: Block fast GUP to TTM huge pages


On 3/23/21 5:37 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 05:34:51PM +0100, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote:
>
>>>> @@ -210,6 +211,20 @@ static vm_fault_t ttm_bo_vm_insert_huge(struct vm_fault *vmf,
>>>>    	if ((pfn & (fault_page_size - 1)) != 0)
>>>>    		goto out_fallback;
>>>> +	/*
>>>> +	 * Huge entries must be special, that is marking them as devmap
>>>> +	 * with no backing device map range. If there is a backing
>>>> +	 * range, Don't insert a huge entry.
>>>> +	 * If this check turns out to be too much of a performance hit,
>>>> +	 * we can instead have drivers indicate whether they may have
>>>> +	 * backing device map ranges and if not, skip this lookup.
>>>> +	 */
>>> I think we can do this statically:
>>> - if it's system memory we know there's no devmap for it, and we do the
>>>     trick to block gup_fast
>> Yes, that should work.
>>> - if it's iomem, we know gup_fast wont work anyway if don't set PFN_DEV,
>>>     so might as well not do that
>> I think gup_fast will unfortunately mistake a huge iomem page for an
>> ordinary page and try to access a non-existant struct page for it, unless we
>> do the devmap trick.
>>
>> And the lookup would then be for the rare case where a driver would have
>> already registered a dev_pagemap for an iomem area which may also be mapped
>> through TTM (like the patch from Felix a couple of weeks ago). If a driver
>> can promise not to do that, then we can safely remove the lookup.
> Isn't the devmap PTE flag arch optional? Does this fall back to not
> using huge pages on arches that don't support it?

Good point. No, currently it's only conditioned on transhuge page support.
Need to condition it on also devmap support.

>
> Also, I feel like this code to install "pte_special" huge pages does
> not belong in the drm subsystem..

I could add helpers in huge_memory.c:

vmf_insert_pfn_pmd_prot_special() and
vmf_insert_pfn_pud_prot_special()

/Thomas

>
> Jason

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ