All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Erik Bosman <ebn310@few.vu.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/5] x86: Add a comment clarifying LDT context switching
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 07:41:18 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141021054118.GA4420@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrVmS+ZNj+iXNTy5zC8araMH=x=jUBNDMUNPDJwu0huMMQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 09:21:42AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I think it's the same as in the other case in switch_mm. leave_mm does
> cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(active_mm)), and, once that has
> happened, modify_ldt won't send an IPI to this CPU. So, if leave_mm
> runs, and then another CPU calls modify_ldt on the mm that is in lazy
> mode here, it won't update our LDT register, so the LDT register and
> prev->context.ldt might not match.

Ok, let me see if I can follow with an example:

We call leave_mm() on, say, cpu 3 and mm_cpumask(active_mm) has cpu 3 and
4 set. Then, on cpu 4 we call modify_ldt on that same mm and there in
alloc_ldt() we have this:

                if (!cpumask_equal(mm_cpumask(current->mm),
                                   cpumask_of(smp_processor_id())))
                        smp_call_function(flush_ldt, current->mm, 1);

and since we've cleared cpu 3 from the cpumask, we don't flush_ldt()
on it and there you have the difference.

Am I close?

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--

  reply	other threads:[~2014-10-21  5:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-14 22:57 [RFC 0/5] CR4 handling improvements Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-14 22:57 ` [RFC 1/5] x86: Clean up cr4 manipulation Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-16  8:16   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-16 11:18     ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-16 11:29       ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-16 15:32         ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-16 15:47           ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-14 22:57 ` [RFC 2/5] x86: Store a per-cpu shadow copy of CR4 Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-16  8:26   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-16 11:49   ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-16 15:30     ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-14 22:57 ` [RFC 3/5] x86: Add a comment clarifying LDT context switching Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-16 15:49   ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-16 16:21     ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-21  5:41       ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2014-10-21  5:44         ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-21  6:05           ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-14 22:57 ` [RFC 4/5] perf: Add pmu callbacks to track event mapping and unmapping Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-14 22:57 ` [RFC 5/5] x86,perf: Only allow rdpmc if a perf_event is mapped Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-16  8:42   ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-16 15:37     ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-16 15:57     ` Borislav Petkov
2014-10-17  0:00   ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-19 20:23     ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-19 21:33       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-19 22:05         ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-19 22:20           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-19 22:57             ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-20  8:33               ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-20 16:49                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-20 17:39                   ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-21  8:59                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-19 21:35     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-20  0:08       ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-20  8:48         ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-20  9:24           ` Martin Schwidefsky
2014-10-20 10:51           ` Hendrik Brueckner
2014-10-21  9:14             ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-21 15:52               ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-21  4:06 ` [RFC 0/5] CR4 handling improvements Vince Weaver
2014-10-21  4:28   ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-10-21 15:00     ` Vince Weaver
2014-10-21 16:04       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-21 17:05         ` Vince Weaver
2014-10-23 11:42           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-24 12:41             ` Vince Weaver
2014-10-24 22:14               ` Andy Lutomirski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20141021054118.GA4420@pd.tnic \
    --to=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=ebn310@few.vu.nl \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.