All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Chris Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.ma>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH for 4.18] rseq: use __u64 for rseq_cs fields, validate user inputs
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:16:59 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <825871008.10839.1530573419561.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzZYOatOtjrm7fD7878_SzCAmEoEu74n0+pgd7faH-sTQ@mail.gmail.com>

----- On Jul 2, 2018, at 7:06 PM, Linus Torvalds torvalds@linux-foundation.org wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 4:00 PM Mathieu Desnoyers
> <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately, that rseq->rseq_cs field needs to be updated by user-space
>> with single-copy atomicity. Therefore, we want 32-bit user-space to initialize
>> the padding with 0, and only update the low bits with single-copy atomicity.
> 
> Well... It's actually still single-copy atomicity as a 64-bit value.
> 
> Why? Because it doesn't matter how you write the upper bits. You'll be
> writing the same value to them (zero) anyway.
> 
> So who cares if the write ends up being two instructions, because the
> write to the upper bits doesn't actually *do* anything.
> 
> Hmm?

Are there any kind of guarantees that a __u64 update on a 32-bit architecture
won't be torn into something daft like byte-per-byte stores when performed
from C code ?

I don't worry whether the upper bits get updated or how, but I really care
about not having store tearing of the low bits update.

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Chris Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH for 4.18] rseq: use __u64 for rseq_cs fields, validate user inputs
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:16:59 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <825871008.10839.1530573419561.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzZYOatOtjrm7fD7878_SzCAmEoEu74n0+pgd7faH-sTQ@mail.gmail.com>

----- On Jul 2, 2018, at 7:06 PM, Linus Torvalds torvalds@linux-foundation.org wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 4:00 PM Mathieu Desnoyers
> <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately, that rseq->rseq_cs field needs to be updated by user-space
>> with single-copy atomicity. Therefore, we want 32-bit user-space to initialize
>> the padding with 0, and only update the low bits with single-copy atomicity.
> 
> Well... It's actually still single-copy atomicity as a 64-bit value.
> 
> Why? Because it doesn't matter how you write the upper bits. You'll be
> writing the same value to them (zero) anyway.
> 
> So who cares if the write ends up being two instructions, because the
> write to the upper bits doesn't actually *do* anything.
> 
> Hmm?

Are there any kind of guarantees that a __u64 update on a 32-bit architecture
won't be torn into something daft like byte-per-byte stores when performed
from C code ?

I don't worry whether the upper bits get updated or how, but I really care
about not having store tearing of the low bits update.

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-02 23:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 86+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-02 22:31 [RFC PATCH for 4.18] rseq: use __u64 for rseq_cs fields, validate user inputs Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 22:31 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 22:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-02 22:45   ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-02 23:00   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:00     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:06     ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-02 23:06       ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-02 23:16       ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2018-07-02 23:16         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:22         ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-02 23:22           ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-02 23:25           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:25             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:22         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:22           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:37           ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-02 23:37             ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-03  1:19             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03  1:19               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03  2:01               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03  2:01                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03  2:18                 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03  2:18                   ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03  2:30                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03  2:30                     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03  2:33                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-03  2:33                       ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-03  2:44                     ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03  2:44                       ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03  8:14                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03  8:14                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03  8:29                       ` Heiko Carstens
2018-07-03  8:29                         ` Heiko Carstens
2018-07-03  8:43                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03  8:43                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03  8:55                           ` Heiko Carstens
2018-07-03  8:55                             ` Heiko Carstens
2018-07-03  9:17                             ` Heiko Carstens
2018-07-03  9:17                               ` Heiko Carstens
2018-07-03  9:24                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03  9:24                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03  9:21                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03  9:21                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 16:40                               ` Andi Kleen
2018-07-03 16:40                                 ` Andi Kleen
2018-07-03 17:02                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:02                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:06                                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-03 17:06                                   ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-03 17:10                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03 17:10                                   ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03 17:26                                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 17:26                                     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 17:34                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:34                                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:38                                     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 17:38                                       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 17:48                                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:48                                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:58                                         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 17:58                                           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 18:11                                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 18:11                                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 18:15                                             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 18:15                                               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 18:28                                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 18:28                                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 18:41                                                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 18:41                                                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 19:08                                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 19:08                                                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:59                                         ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03 17:59                                           ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03 18:09                                           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 18:09                                             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 18:10                                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 18:10                                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03  0:19         ` Christopher Lameter
2018-07-03  0:19           ` Christopher Lameter
2018-07-03  0:23           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03  0:23             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03  0:35             ` Christopher Lameter
2018-07-03  0:35               ` Christopher Lameter
2018-07-03  1:17               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03  1:17                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers

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=825871008.10839.1530573419561.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=bmaurer@fb.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=davejwatson@fb.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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.