Message-ID: <7d58be73-a8e5-4ec7-bbdc-238b0c25c77b@csgroup.eu>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 10:01:17 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Nicholas Piggin
 <npiggin@...il.com>, Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org>,
 Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
 Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu
 <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>, Shuah Khan
 <shuah@...nel.org>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/17] vdso: Change getrandom's generation to unsigned
 long



Le 26/08/2024 à 09:50, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit :
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 09:13:14AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Performing SMP atomic operations on u64 fails on powerpc32.
>>
>> Random driver generation is handled as unsigned long not u64,
>> see for instance base_cnrg or struct crng.
>>
>> Use the same type for vDSO's getrandom as it gets copied
>> from the above. This is also in line with the local
>> current_generation which is already an unsigned long.
> 
> This isn't going to work when 32-bit userspace tries to access a 64-bit
> kernel.
> 
> I had "fixed" this with a vdso_kernel_ulong type way back in an earlier
> version: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Flkml%2F20240528122352.2485958-5-Jason%40zx2c4.com%2F%23Z31include%3Avdso%3Atypes.h&data=05%7C02%7Cchristophe.leroy%40csgroup.eu%7C41747dd989164267c1cc08dcc5a3c424%7C8b87af7d86474dc78df45f69a2011bb5%7C0%7C0%7C638602554376441761%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Tf9ShSN6aOOFZ1HymAmHhj0xhQ6BUtHJX95t50gsp9k%3D&reserved=0
> 
> But tglx pointed out in that thread that this actually isn't necessary:
> 
> | All of this is pointless because if a 32-bit application runs on a
> | 64-bit kernel it has to use the 64-bit 'generation'. So why on earth do
> | we need magic here for a 32-bit kernel?
> |
> | Just use u64 for both and spare all this voodoo. We're seriously not
> | "optimizing" for 32-bit kernels.
> |
> | All what happens on a 32-bit kernel is that the RNG will store the
> | unsigned long (32bit) generation into a 64bit variable:
> |
> | 	smp_store_release(&_vdso_rng_data.generation, next_gen + 1);
> |
> | As the upper 32bit are always zero, there is no issue vs. load store
> | tearing at all. So there is zero benefit for this aside of slightly
> | "better" user space code when running on a 32-bit kernel. Who cares?
> 
> So I just got rid of it and used a u64 as he suggested.
> 
> However, there's also an additional reason why it's not worth churning
> further over this - because VM_DROPPABLE is 64-bit only (due to flags in
> vma bits), likely so is vDSO getrandom() for the time being. So I think
> it makes more sense to retool this series to be ppc64, and then if you
> really really want 32-bit and can convince folks it matters, then all of
> these parts (for example, here, the fact that the smp helper doesn't
> want to tear) can be fixed up in a separate series.

So yes I really really want it on ppc32 because this is the only type of 
boards I have and this is really were we need getrandom() to be 
optimised, indeed ppc64 was sherry-on-the-cake in my series, I just 
added it because it was easy to do after doing ppc32.

Christophe

Powered by blists - more mailing lists