linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] membarrier: riscv: Provide core serializing command

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: <65350c17-3fcf-a057-a280-f6a5d36dcb21@efficios.com>
Date:   Fri, 4 Aug 2023 10:20:16 -0400
From:   Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To:     Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
Cc:     paulmck@...nel.org, paul.walmsley@...ive.com, palmer@...belt.com,
        aou@...s.berkeley.edu, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mmaas@...gle.com, hboehm@...gle.com,
        striker@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] membarrier: riscv: Provide core serializing command

On 8/3/23 20:16, Andrea Parri wrote:
>> Can you double-check that riscv switch_mm() implies a fence.i or equivalent
>> on the CPU doing the switch_mm ?
> 
> AFAICT, (riscv) switch_mm() does not guarantee that.
> 
> 
>> AFAIR membarrier use of sync_core_before_usermode relies on switch_mm
>> issuing a core serializing instruction.
> 
> I see.  Thanks for the clarification.
> 
> BTW, the comment in __schedule() suggests that membarrier also relies on
> switch_mm() issuing a full memory barrier: I don't think this holds.
> 
> Removing the "deferred icache flush" logic in switch_mm() - in favour of
> a "plain" MB; FENCE.I - would meet both of these requirements.

What is the relationship between FENCE.I and instruction cache flush on 
RISC-V ?

On other architectures, there is need for careful flushing of the 
instruction cache for the address range that was modified, _and_ to 
issue a core serializing instruction on all cores (this last part being 
performed by membarrier SYNC_CORE) between the point where the old 
instructions were executed and before the new instructions are executed.

Thanks,

Mathieu

> 
> Other ideas?
> 
>    Andrea

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com