All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>, Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/6] Fix "x86/alternatives: Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()"
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:32:19 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180902173224.30606-2-namit@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180902173224.30606-1-namit@vmware.com>

text_mutex is expected to be held before text_poke() is called, but we
cannot add a lockdep assertion since kgdb does not take it, and instead
*supposedly* ensures the lock is not taken and will not be acquired by
any other core while text_poke() is running.

The reason for the "supposedly" comment is that it is not entirely clear
that this would be the case if gdb_do_roundup is zero.

Add a comment to clarify this behavior, and restore the assertions as
they were before the recent commit.

This partially reverts commit 9222f606506c ("x86/alternatives:
Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()")

Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Fixes: 9222f606506c ("x86/alternatives: Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()")
Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c b/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
index b9d5e7c9ef43..e9be18245698 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
@@ -684,6 +684,11 @@ void *__init_or_module text_poke_early(void *addr, const void *opcode,
  * It means the size must be writable atomically and the address must be aligned
  * in a way that permits an atomic write. It also makes sure we fit on a single
  * page.
+ *
+ * Context: Must be called under text_mutex. kgdb is an exception: it does not
+ *	    hold the mutex, as it *supposedly* ensures that no other core is
+ *	    holding the mutex and ensures that none of them will acquire the
+ *	    mutex while the code runs.
  */
 void *text_poke(void *addr, const void *opcode, size_t len)
 {
@@ -698,8 +703,6 @@ void *text_poke(void *addr, const void *opcode, size_t len)
 	 */
 	BUG_ON(!after_bootmem);
 
-	lockdep_assert_held(&text_mutex);
-
 	if (!core_kernel_text((unsigned long)addr)) {
 		pages[0] = vmalloc_to_page(addr);
 		pages[1] = vmalloc_to_page(addr + PAGE_SIZE);
-- 
2.17.1

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	<x86@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	<linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>, Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/6] Fix "x86/alternatives: Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()"
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:32:19 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180902173224.30606-2-namit@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180902173224.30606-1-namit@vmware.com>

text_mutex is expected to be held before text_poke() is called, but we
cannot add a lockdep assertion since kgdb does not take it, and instead
*supposedly* ensures the lock is not taken and will not be acquired by
any other core while text_poke() is running.

The reason for the "supposedly" comment is that it is not entirely clear
that this would be the case if gdb_do_roundup is zero.

Add a comment to clarify this behavior, and restore the assertions as
they were before the recent commit.

This partially reverts commit 9222f606506c ("x86/alternatives:
Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()")

Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Fixes: 9222f606506c ("x86/alternatives: Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()")
Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c b/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
index b9d5e7c9ef43..e9be18245698 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
@@ -684,6 +684,11 @@ void *__init_or_module text_poke_early(void *addr, const void *opcode,
  * It means the size must be writable atomically and the address must be aligned
  * in a way that permits an atomic write. It also makes sure we fit on a single
  * page.
+ *
+ * Context: Must be called under text_mutex. kgdb is an exception: it does not
+ *	    hold the mutex, as it *supposedly* ensures that no other core is
+ *	    holding the mutex and ensures that none of them will acquire the
+ *	    mutex while the code runs.
  */
 void *text_poke(void *addr, const void *opcode, size_t len)
 {
@@ -698,8 +703,6 @@ void *text_poke(void *addr, const void *opcode, size_t len)
 	 */
 	BUG_ON(!after_bootmem);
 
-	lockdep_assert_held(&text_mutex);
-
 	if (!core_kernel_text((unsigned long)addr)) {
 		pages[0] = vmalloc_to_page(addr);
 		pages[1] = vmalloc_to_page(addr + PAGE_SIZE);
-- 
2.17.1


  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-02 17:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-02 17:32 [PATCH v2 0/6] x86/alternatives: text_poke() fixes Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32 ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32 ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2018-09-02 17:32   ` [PATCH v2 1/6] Fix "x86/alternatives: Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()" Nadav Amit
2018-09-06 19:40   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06 19:42     ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-06 19:53       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06 19:58         ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-06 20:25           ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06 20:57             ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-06 21:41               ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-02 17:32 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] x86/mm: temporary mm struct Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32   ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] fork: provide a function for copying init_mm Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32   ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] x86/alternatives: initializing temporary mm for patching Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32   ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-06  9:01   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-07 20:52     ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] x86/alternatives: use temporary mm for text poking Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32   ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] x86/alternatives: remove text_poke() return value Nadav Amit
2018-09-02 17:32   ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-05 18:56 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] x86/alternatives: text_poke() fixes Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-05 19:02   ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-05 19:10     ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-06  8:13       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06  8:42         ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06  9:18         ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06 10:16         ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06 17:01           ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-06 17:17             ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06 17:58               ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-06 18:09                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-09-06 18:31                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06 18:38                     ` Nadav Amit
2018-09-06 19:19                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-06 17:23             ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20180902173224.30606-2-namit@vmware.com \
    --to=namit@vmware.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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.