linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: hugetlb: enable __HAVE_ARCH_FLUSH_HUGETLB_TLB

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: <7208b261-d764-2332-1c0b-ff0cda5469dc@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Aug 2023 21:36:44 +0800
From:   Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
CC:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
        Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>, <kirill@...temov.name>,
        <joel@...lfernandes.org>, <william.kucharski@...cle.com>,
        <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <21cnbao@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: hugetlb: enable
 __HAVE_ARCH_FLUSH_HUGETLB_TLB_RANGE



On 2023/8/1 19:22, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2023/8/1 19:09, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 10:31:45AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>>> +#define __HAVE_ARCH_FLUSH_HUGETLB_TLB_RANGE
>>> +static inline void flush_hugetlb_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>> +                       unsigned long start,
>>> +                       unsigned long end)
>>> +{
>>> +    unsigned long stride = huge_page_size(hstate_vma(vma));
>>> +
>>> +    if (stride != PMD_SIZE && stride != PUD_SIZE)
>>> +        stride = PAGE_SIZE;
>>> +    __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, stride, false, 0);
>>
>> We could use some hints here for the tlb_level (2 for pmd, 1 for pud).
>> Regarding the last_level argument to __flush_tlb_range(), I think it
>> needs to stay false since this function is also called on the
>> hugetlb_unshare_pmds() path where the pud is cleared and needs
>> invalidating.
>>  > That said, maybe you can rewrite it as a switch statement and call
>> flush_pmd_tlb_range() or flush_pud_tlb_range() (just make sure these are
>> defined when CONFIG_HUGETLBFS is enabled).

I try the way your mentioned, it won't change much, will send v3, thanks.