[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ed7c4027-8e15-245f-cdda-0551063761e7@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 20:08:36 +0800
From: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com>
To: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
CC: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
<linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: fix race when vmap stack overflow
在 2022/10/21 16:36, Andrea Parri 写道:
>>>> + atomic_set_release(&spin_shadow_stack, 0);
>>>
>>> Have not really looked the details: should there be a matching acquire?
>>
>> I use atomic_set_release here, because I need earlier memory
>> operations finished to make sure the sp is ready then set the spin
>> flag.
>>
>> The following memory operations order is not important, because we
>> just care about sp value.
>>
>> Also, we use relax amoswap before, because sp has naturelly
>> dependency. But giving them RCsc is okay here, because we don't care
>> about performance here.
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> I'm not really suggesting to add unneeded synchronization, even more
> so in local/private constructs as in this case. It just felt odd to
> see the release without a pairing acquire, so I asked. ;-)
>
> Thanks,
> Andrea
>
>
>> eg:
>> handle_kernel_stack_overflow:
>> +1: la sp, spin_shadow_stack
>> + amoswap.w.aqrl sp, sp, (sp)
>> + bnez sp, 1b
>> +
>> ....
>> + smp_store_release(&spin_shadow_stack, 0);
>> + smp_mb();
>
Hi Andrea, Zhang, Guo:
Consider this implementation:)
smp_store_mb(&spin_shadow_stack, 0);
Thanks,
Tong.
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
>
> .
Powered by blists - more mailing lists