[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1ff716d3-eb3d-477e-ae30-1abe97eee01b@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 21:28:33 +0800
From: Shuai Xue <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: tony.luck@...el.com, bp@...en8.de, nao.horiguchi@...il.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, linmiaohe@...wei.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jpoimboe@...nel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, tianruidong@...ux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] x86/mce: add EX_TYPE_EFAULT_REG as in-kernel
recovery context to fix copy-from-user operations regression
Hi, Peter
在 2025/2/18 20:54, Peter Zijlstra 写道:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 02:33:33PM +0800, Shuai Xue wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c
>> index dac4d64dfb2a..14c2d71c3ce1 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c
>> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
>> #include <asm/traps.h>
>> #include <asm/insn.h>
>> #include <asm/insn-eval.h>
>> +#include <linux/extable.h>
>>
>> #include "internal.h"
>>
>> @@ -285,7 +286,8 @@ static bool is_copy_from_user(struct pt_regs *regs)
>> */
>> static noinstr int error_context(struct mce *m, struct pt_regs *regs)
>> {
>> - int fixup_type;
>> + const struct exception_table_entry *e;
>> + int fixup_type, imm;
>> bool copy_user;
>>
>> if ((m->cs & 3) == 3)
>> @@ -294,9 +296,14 @@ static noinstr int error_context(struct mce *m, struct pt_regs *regs)
>> if (!mc_recoverable(m->mcgstatus))
>> return IN_KERNEL;
>>
>> + e = search_exception_tables(m->ip);
>> + if (!e)
>> + return IN_KERNEL;
>
> You didn't actually build this, did you? Or did you ignore the extra
> noinstr warnings?
I did build and test this patch set on it. But I did not find any warnings.
Could you provide more details?
>
>> /* Allow instrumentation around external facilities usage. */
>> instrumentation_begin();
>> - fixup_type = ex_get_fixup_type(m->ip);
>> + fixup_type = FIELD_GET(EX_DATA_TYPE_MASK, e->data);
>> + imm = FIELD_GET(EX_DATA_IMM_MASK, e->data);
>> copy_user = is_copy_from_user(regs);
>> instrumentation_end();
>>
>> @@ -304,9 +311,13 @@ static noinstr int error_context(struct mce *m, struct pt_regs *regs)
>> case EX_TYPE_UACCESS:
>> if (!copy_user)
>> return IN_KERNEL;
>> - m->kflags |= MCE_IN_KERNEL_COPYIN;
>> - fallthrough;
>> -
>> + m->kflags |= MCE_IN_KERNEL_COPYIN | MCE_IN_KERNEL_RECOV;
>> + return IN_KERNEL_RECOV;
>> + case EX_TYPE_IMM_REG:
>> + if (!copy_user || imm != -EFAULT)
>> + return IN_KERNEL;
>> + m->kflags |= MCE_IN_KERNEL_COPYIN | MCE_IN_KERNEL_RECOV;
>> + return IN_KERNEL_RECOV;
>
> Maybe I'm justnot understanding things, but what's wrong with something
> like the below; why do we care about the ex-type if we know its a MOV
> reading from userspace?
>
> The less we muck about with the extable here, the better.
We need to make sure that we have register a fixup handler for the copy_user
case. If no fixup handler found, the PC accessing posion will trigger #MCE
again and again resulting a hardlock up.
>
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c
> index dac4d64dfb2a..cb021058165f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/severity.c
> @@ -300,13 +300,12 @@ static noinstr int error_context(struct mce *m, struct pt_regs *regs)
> copy_user = is_copy_from_user(regs);
> instrumentation_end();
>
> - switch (fixup_type) {
> - case EX_TYPE_UACCESS:
> - if (!copy_user)
> - return IN_KERNEL;
> - m->kflags |= MCE_IN_KERNEL_COPYIN;
> - fallthrough;
> + if (copy_user) {
> + m->kflags |= MCE_IN_KERNEL_COPYIN | MCE_IN_KERNEL_COPYIN;
> + return IN_KERNEL_RECOV
> + }
>
> + switch (fixup_type) {
> case EX_TYPE_FAULT_MCE_SAFE:
> case EX_TYPE_DEFAULT_MCE_SAFE:
> m->kflags |= MCE_IN_KERNEL_RECOV;
Thanks.
Shuai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists