linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/13] mm/powerpc: Redefine pXd_huge() with pXd

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: <20240318161519.GA5825@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:15:19 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
	"sparclinux@...r.kernel.org" <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>,
	"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/13] mm/powerpc: Redefine pXd_huge() with pXd_leaf()

On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 01:11:59PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 14/03/2024 à 13:53, Peter Xu a écrit :
> > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 08:45:34AM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Le 13/03/2024 à 22:47, peterx@...hat.com a écrit :
> >>> From: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
> >>>
> >>> PowerPC book3s 4K mostly has the same definition on both, except pXd_huge()
> >>> constantly returns 0 for hash MMUs.  As Michael Ellerman pointed out [1],
> >>> it is safe to check _PAGE_PTE on hash MMUs, as the bit will never be set so
> >>> it will keep returning false.
> >>>
> >>> As a reference, __p[mu]d_mkhuge() will trigger a BUG_ON trying to create
> >>> such huge mappings for 4K hash MMUs.  Meanwhile, the major powerpc hugetlb
> >>> pgtable walker __find_linux_pte() already used pXd_leaf() to check hugetlb
> >>> mappings.
> >>>
> >>> The goal should be that we will have one API pXd_leaf() to detect all kinds
> >>> of huge mappings.  AFAICT we need to use the pXd_leaf() impl (rather than
> >>> pXd_huge() ones) to make sure ie. THPs on hash MMU will also return true.
> >>
> >> All kinds of huge mappings ?
> >>
> >> pXd_leaf() will detect only leaf mappings (like pXd_huge() ). There are
> >> also huge mappings through hugepd. On powerpc 8xx we have 8M huge pages
> >> and 512k huge pages. A PGD entry covers 4M so pgd_leaf() won't report
> >> those huge pages.
> > 
> > Ah yes, I should always mention this is in the context of leaf huge pages
> > only.  Are the examples you provided all fall into hugepd category?  If so
> > I can reword the commit message, as:
> 
> On powerpc 8xx, only the 8M huge pages fall into the hugepd case.
> 
> The 512k hugepages are at PTE level, they are handled more or less like 
> CONT_PTE on ARM. see function set_huge_pte_at() for more context.
> 
> You can also look at pte_leaf_size() and pgd_leaf_size().

IMHO leaf should return false if the thing is pointing to a next level
page table, even if that next level is fully populated with contiguous
pages.

This seems more aligned with the contig page direction that hugepd
should be moved over to..

> By the way pgd_leaf_size() looks odd because it is called only when 
> pgd_leaf_size() returns true, which never happens for 8M pages.

Like this, you should reach the actual final leaf that the HW will
load and leaf_size() should say it is greater size than the current
table level. Other levels should return 0.

If necessary the core MM code should deal with this by iterating over
adjacent tables.

Jason