| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 06:26:58 -0800
From: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
To: Yu Xu <xuyu@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org,
mingo@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de, luto@...nel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mike.kravetz@...cle.com,
jon.grimm@....com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/14] x86/clear_page: add clear_page_uncached()
Yu Xu <xuyu@...ux.alibaba.com> writes:
> On 12/10/21 12:37 PM, Ankur Arora wrote:
>> Yu Xu <xuyu@...ux.alibaba.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 10/21/21 1:02 AM, Ankur Arora wrote:
>>>> Expose the low-level uncached primitives (clear_page_movnt(),
>>>> clear_page_clzero()) as alternatives via clear_page_uncached().
>>>> Also fallback to clear_page(), if X86_FEATURE_MOVNT_SLOW is set
>>>> and the CPU does not have X86_FEATURE_CLZERO.
>>>> Both the uncached primitives use stores which are weakly ordered
>>>> with respect to other instructions accessing the memory hierarchy.
>>>> To ensure that callers don't mix accesses to different types of
>>>> address_spaces, annotate clear_user_page_uncached(), and
>>>> clear_page_uncached() as taking __incoherent pointers as arguments.
>>>> Also add clear_page_uncached_make_coherent() which provides the
>>>> necessary store fence to flush out the uncached regions.
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Notes:
>>>> This patch adds the fallback definitions of clear_user_page_uncached()
>>>> etc in include/linux/mm.h which is likely not the right place for it.
>>>> I'm guessing these should be moved to include/asm-generic/page.h
>>>> (or maybe a new include/asm-generic/page_uncached.h) and for
>>>> architectures that do have arch/$arch/include/asm/page.h (which
>>>> seems like all of them), also replicate there?
>>>> Anyway, wanted to first check if that's the way to do it, before
>>>> doing that.
>>>> arch/x86/include/asm/page.h | 10 ++++++++++
>>>> arch/x86/include/asm/page_32.h | 9 +++++++++
>>>> arch/x86/include/asm/page_64.h | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> include/linux/mm.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>>> 4 files changed, 65 insertions(+)
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/page_32.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/page_32.h
>>>> index 94dbd51df58f..163be03ac422 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/page_32.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/page_32.h
>>>> @@ -39,6 +39,15 @@ static inline void clear_page(void *page)
>>>> memset(page, 0, PAGE_SIZE);
>>>> }
>>>> +static inline void clear_page_uncached(__incoherent void *page)
>>>> +{
>>>> + clear_page((__force void *) page);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static inline void clear_page_uncached_make_coherent(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static inline void copy_page(void *to, void *from)
>>>> {
>>>> memcpy(to, from, PAGE_SIZE);
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/page_64.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/page_64.h
>>>> index 3c53f8ef8818..d7946047c70f 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/page_64.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/page_64.h
>>>> @@ -56,6 +56,38 @@ static inline void clear_page(void *page)
>>>> : "cc", "memory", "rax", "rcx");
>>>> }
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * clear_page_uncached: only allowed on __incoherent memory regions.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static inline void clear_page_uncached(__incoherent void *page)
>>>> +{
>>>> + alternative_call_2(clear_page_movnt,
>>>> + clear_page, X86_FEATURE_MOVNT_SLOW,
>>>> + clear_page_clzero, X86_FEATURE_CLZERO,
>>>> + "=D" (page),
>>>> + "0" (page)
>>>> + : "cc", "memory", "rax", "rcx");
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * clear_page_uncached_make_coherent: executes the necessary store
>>>> + * fence after which __incoherent regions can be safely accessed.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static inline void clear_page_uncached_make_coherent(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * Keep the sfence for oldinstr and clzero separate to guard against
>>>> + * the possibility that a cpu-model both has X86_FEATURE_MOVNT_SLOW
>>>> + * and X86_FEATURE_CLZERO.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * The alternatives need to be in the same order as the ones
>>>> + * in clear_page_uncached().
>>>> + */
>>>> + alternative_2("sfence",
>>>> + "", X86_FEATURE_MOVNT_SLOW,
>>>> + "sfence", X86_FEATURE_CLZERO);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> void copy_page(void *to, void *from);
>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_5LEVEL
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
>>>> index 73a52aba448f..b88069d1116c 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
>>>> @@ -3192,6 +3192,20 @@ static inline bool vma_is_special_huge(const struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>>>> #endif /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE || CONFIG_HUGETLBFS */
>>>> +#ifndef clear_user_page_uncached
>>>
>>> Hi Ankur Arora,
>>>
>>> I've been looking for where clear_user_page_uncached is defined in this
>>> patchset, but failed.
>>>
>>> There should be something like follows in arch/x86, right?
>>>
>>> static inline void clear_user_page_uncached(__incoherent void *page,
>>> unsigned long vaddr, struct page *pg)
>>> {
>>> clear_page_uncached(page);
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> Did I miss something?
>>>
>> Hi Yu Xu,
>> Defined in include/linux/mm.h. Just below :).
>
> Thanks for your reply :)
>
> This is the version when #ifndef clear_user_page_uncached, i.e., fall
> back to standard clear_user_page.
>
> But where is the uncached version of clear_user_page? I am looking for
> this.
Sorry, my bad. There is a hunk missing. Not sure how, but this hunk
(from patch 7) got dropped in version that I sent out:
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/page.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/page.h
index 4d5810c8fab7..89229f2db34a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/page.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/page.h
@@ -28,6 +28,16 @@ static inline void clear_user_page(void *page, unsigned long vaddr,
clear_page(page);
}
+#define clear_user_page_uncached clear_user_page_uncached
+/*
+ * clear_page_uncached: allowed on only __incoherent memory regions.
+ */
+static inline void clear_user_page_uncached(__incoherent void *page,
+ unsigned long vaddr, struct page *pg)
+{
+ clear_page_uncached(page);
+}
+
static inline void copy_user_page(void *to, void *from, unsigned long vaddr,
struct page *topage)
{
It is identical to the version that you surmised was missing. Thanks for
the close reading.
Ankur
>>
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * clear_user_page_uncached: fallback to the standard clear_user_page().
>>>> + */
>>>> +static inline void clear_user_page_uncached(__incoherent void *page,
>>>> + unsigned long vaddr, struct page *pg)
>>>> +{
>>>> + clear_user_page((__force void *)page, vaddr, pg);
>>>> +}
>> That said, as this note in the patch mentions, this isn't really a great
>> place for this definition. As you also mention, the right place for this
>> would be somewhere in the arch/.../include and include/asm-generic hierarchy.
>>
>>>> This patch adds the fallback definitions of clear_user_page_uncached()
>>>> etc in include/linux/mm.h which is likely not the right place for it.
>>>> I'm guessing these should be moved to include/asm-generic/page.h
>>>> (or maybe a new include/asm-generic/page_uncached.h) and for
>>>> architectures that do have arch/$arch/include/asm/page.h (which
>>>> seems like all of them), also replicate there?
>>>> Anyway, wanted to first check if that's the way to do it, before
>>>> doing that.
>> Recommendations on how to handle this, welcome.
>> Thanks
>> --
>> ankur
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists