linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/11] mm: page_vma_mapped_walk(): use pmd_read

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: <20210615094639.GC19878@willie-the-truck>
Date:   Tue, 15 Jun 2021 10:46:39 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
        Wang Yugui <wangyugui@...-tech.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] mm: page_vma_mapped_walk(): use pmd_read_atomic()

On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 04:42:49PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 12:05:42PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable-3level.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable-3level.h
> > > index e896ebef8c24cb..0bf1fdec928e71 100644
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable-3level.h
> > > @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ static inline void native_set_pte(pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
> > >  static inline pmd_t pmd_read_atomic(pmd_t *pmdp)
> > >  {
> > >  	pmdval_t ret;
> > > -	u32 *tmp = (u32 *)pmdp;
> > > +	u32 *tmp = READ_ONCE((u32 *)pmdp);
> > >  
> > >  	ret = (pmdval_t) (*tmp);
> > >  	if (ret) {
> > > @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static inline pmd_t pmd_read_atomic(pmd_t *pmdp)
> > >  		 * or we can end up with a partial pmd.
> > >  		 */
> > >  		smp_rmb();
> > > -		ret |= ((pmdval_t)*(tmp + 1)) << 32;
> > > +		ret |= READ_ONCE((pmdval_t)*(tmp + 1)) << 32;
> > >  	}
> > 
> > Maybe that.  Or maybe now (since Will's changes) it can just do
> > one READ_ONCE() of the whole, then adjust its local copy.
> 
> I think the smb_rmb() is critical here to ensure a PTE table pointer
> is coherent, READ_ONCE is not a substitute, unless I am miss
> understanding what Will's changes are???

Yes, I agree that the barrier is needed here for x86 PAE. I would really
have liked to enforce native-sized access in READ_ONCE(), but unfortunately
there is plenty of code out there which is resilient to a 64-bit access
being split into two separate 32-bit accesses and so I wasn't able to go
that far.

That being said, pmd_read_atomic() probably _should_ be using READ_ONCE()
because using it inconsistently can give rise to broken codegen, e.g. if
you do:

	pmdval_t x, y, z;

	x = *pmdp;			// Invalid
	y = READ_ONCE(*pmdp);		// Valid
	if (pmd_valid(y))
		z = *pmdp;		// Invalid again!

Then the compiler can allocate the same register for x and z, but will
issue an additional load for y. If a concurrent update takes place to the
pmd which transitions from Invalid -> Valid, then it will look as though
things went back in time, because z will be stale. We actually hit this
on arm64 in practice [1].

Will

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20171003114244.430374928@linuxfoundation.org/