linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm: Add support for unaccepted memory

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: <708c758f-2305-4fe6-ddcd-6881794402a5@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Aug 2021 13:59:01 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc:     Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Varad Gautam <varad.gautam@...e.com>,
        Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@...e.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm: Add support for unaccepted memory

On 8/12/21 1:49 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 07:14:20AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> On 8/12/21 1:19 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
>> maybe_accept_page()
>> {
>> 	unsigned long huge_pfn = page_to_phys(page) / PMD_SIZE;
>>
>> 	/* Test the bit before taking any locks: */
>> 	if (test_bit(huge_pfn, &accepted_bitmap))
>> 		return;
>>
>> 	spin_lock_irq();
>> 	/* Retest inside the lock: */
>> 	if (test_bit(huge_pfn, &accepted_bitmap))
>> 		return;
>> 	tdx_accept_page(page, PMD_SIZE);
>> 	set_bit(huge_pfn, &accepted_bitmap));
>> 	spin_unlock_irq();
>> }
>>
>> That's still not great.  It's still a global lock and the lock is still
>> held for quite a while because that accept isn't going to be lightning
>> fast.  But, at least it's not holding any *other* locks.  It also
>> doesn't take any locks in the fast path where the 2MB page was already
>> accepted.
> 
> I expect a cache line with bitmap to bounce around during warm up. One
> cache line covers a gig of RAM.

The bitmap bouncing around isn't going to really matter when you have a
global lock protecting it from writes.

> It's also not clear at all at what point the static key has to be
> switched. We don't have any obvious point where we can say we are done
> with accepting (unless you advocate for proactive accepting).

Two easy options:
1. Run over the bitmap and counts the bits left.  That can be done
   outside the lock even.
2. Keep a counter of the number of bits set in the bitmap.

> I like PageOffline() because we only need to consult the cache page
> allocator already have in hands before looking into bitmap.

I like it too.  But, it's really nasty if the value is only valid deep
in the allocator.

We could keep the PageOffline() thing and then move it to some other
field in 'struct page' that's only valid between ClearPageOffline() and
prep_new_page().   Some magic value that says: "This page has not yet
been accepted, you better check the bitmap."  Something like:

	if (TestClearPageOffline(page))
		page->private = 0Xdeadbeef;

and then check page->private in prep_new_page(). There should be plenty
of 'struct page' space to hijack in that small window.

BTW, I was going to actually try and hack something up, but I got
annoyed that your patches don't apply upstream and gave up.  A git tree
with all of the dependencies would be nice. <hint, hint>