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]
Date:   Tue, 14 Nov 2023 19:23:25 +0800
From:   "Yin, Fengwei" <>
To:     "Huang, Ying" <>
CC:     Matthew Wilcox <>,
        "zhangpeng (AS)" <>, <>,
        <>, <>,
        <>, <>, <>,
        <>, <>, <>,
        <>, <>, <>,
        Nanyong Sun <>,
        Kefeng Wang <>
Subject: Re: [Question]: major faults are still triggered after mlockall when
 numa balancing

On 11/13/2023 10:02 AM, Huang, Ying wrote:
>>> There are other places in the kernel where the PTE is cleared, for
>>> example, move_ptes() in mremap.c.  IIUC, we need to audit all them.
>>> Another possible solution is to check PTE again with PTL held before
>>> reading in file data.  This will increase the overhead of major fault
>>> path.  Is it acceptable?
>> What if we check the PTE without page table lock acquired?
> The PTE is zeroed temporarily only with PTL held.  So, if we acquire the
> PTL in filemap_fault() and check the PTE, the PTE which is zeroed in
> do_numa_page() will be non-zero now.  So we can avoid the major fault.

> But, if we don't acquire the PTL, the PTE may still be zero.
For do_numa_page()/change_pte_range(), it does very limit thing during
PTE is cleared. Considering the code path of do_read_fault(), it's likely
the PTE is none-zero.

My concern to acquiring lock is that it brings extra PTL lock acquire/release
for other more common cases.

Yin, Fengwei

> --
> Best Regards,
> Huang, Ying

Powered by blists - more mailing lists