linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/alternatives: remove false sharing in poke_int3

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: <CANn89iKwPpV7v=EnK2ac5KjHSef64eyVwUST=q=+oFaqTB95sQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2025 08:53:31 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, 
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, 
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, 
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, 
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org, 
	bpf@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, 
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/alternatives: remove false sharing in poke_int3_handler()

On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 8:47 AM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 8:16 AM Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > * Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > What's the adversarial workload here? Spamming bpf_stats_enabled on all
> > > > CPUs in parallel? Or mixing it with some other text_poke_bp_batch()
> > > > user if bpf_stats_enabled serializes access?
> >             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > > > Does anything undesirable happen in that case?
> > >
> > > The case of multiple threads trying to flip bpf_stats_enabled is
> > > handled by bpf_stats_enabled_mutex.
> >
> > So my suggested workload wasn't adversarial enough due to
> > bpf_stats_enabled_mutex: how about some other workload that doesn't
> > serialize access to text_poke_bp_batch()?
>
> Do you have a specific case in mind that I can test on these big platforms ?
>
> text_poke_bp_batch() calls themselves are serialized by text_mutex, it
> is not clear what you are looking for.


BTW the atomic_cond_read_acquire() part is never called even during my
stress test.

We could add this eventually:

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c b/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
index d7afbf822c45..5d364e990055 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
@@ -2418,7 +2418,7 @@ static void text_poke_bp_batch(struct
text_poke_loc *tp, unsigned int nr_entries
        for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
                atomic_t *refs = per_cpu_ptr(&bp_refs, i);

-               if (!atomic_dec_and_test(refs))
+               if (unlikely(!atomic_dec_and_test(refs)))
                        atomic_cond_read_acquire(refs, !VAL);
        }
 }