linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 01/23] mm: Introduce PTE

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: <YlXWzf3nF+lGA5fn@xz-m1.local>
Date:   Tue, 12 Apr 2022 15:45:17 -0400
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To:     Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/23] mm: Introduce PTE_MARKER swap entry

On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 11:07:56AM +1000, Alistair Popple wrote:
> Hi Peter,

Hi, Alistair,

> 
> I noticed this while reviewing the next patch in the series. I think you need to
> add CONFIG_PTE_MARKER to the below as well:
> 
> #if defined(CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE) || defined(CONFIG_MIGRATION) || \
>     defined(CONFIG_DEVICE_PRIVATE)
> static inline int non_swap_entry(swp_entry_t entry)
> {
> 	return swp_type(entry) >= MAX_SWAPFILES;
> }
> #else
> static inline int non_swap_entry(swp_entry_t entry)
> {
> 	return 0;
> }
> #endif
> 
> Otherwise marker entries will be treated as swap entries, which is wrong for
> example in swapin_walk_pmd_entry() as marker entries are no longer considered
> pte_none().

Thanks for the comment, that makes sense.

Instead of adding PTE_MARKER into this equation, I'm going backward and
wondering purely on why we need to bother with non_swap_entry() at all if
MAX_SWAPFILES is already defined with proper knowledges of all these bits.

#define MAX_SWAPFILES \
	((1 << MAX_SWAPFILES_SHIFT) - SWP_DEVICE_NUM - \
	SWP_MIGRATION_NUM - SWP_HWPOISON_NUM)

So, I agree with your analysis, but instead of adding PTE_MARKER, what do
you think about we dropping that complexity as a whole (possibly with a
standalone patch)?

---8<---
diff --git a/include/linux/swapops.h b/include/linux/swapops.h
index d356ab4047f7..5af852b68805 100644
--- a/include/linux/swapops.h
+++ b/include/linux/swapops.h
@@ -387,18 +387,10 @@ static inline void num_poisoned_pages_inc(void)
 }
 #endif
 
-#if defined(CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE) || defined(CONFIG_MIGRATION) || \
-    defined(CONFIG_DEVICE_PRIVATE)
 static inline int non_swap_entry(swp_entry_t entry)
 {
        return swp_type(entry) >= MAX_SWAPFILES;
 }
-#else
-static inline int non_swap_entry(swp_entry_t entry)
-{
-       return 0;
-}
-#endif
 
 #endif /* CONFIG_MMU */
 #endif /* _LINUX_SWAPOPS_H */
---8<---

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu