From: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Cc: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] um: asm/page.h: zero out a pte's high value in set_pte_val()
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 15:31:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bn845ufn.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56AB2730.5020009@nod.at> (Richard Weinberger's message of "Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:47:44 +0100")
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> writes:
> Am 29.01.2016 um 02:32 schrieb Nicolai Stange:
>> Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> writes:
>>
>>> Am 29.01.2016 um 00:56 schrieb Nicolai Stange:
>>>> Commit 16da306849d0 ("um: kill pfn_t")
>>>> introduced a compile warning for defconfig:
>>>>
>>>> arch/um/kernel/skas/mmu.c:38:206: warning: right shift count >= width of type
>>>> [-Wshift-count-overflow]
>>>>
>>>> Aforementioned patch changes the definition of the phys_to_pfn() macro from
>>>>
>>>> ((pfn_t) ((p) >> PAGE_SHIFT))
>>>>
>>>> to
>>>>
>>>> ((p) >> PAGE_SHIFT)
>>>>
>>>> This effectively changes the phys_to_pfn() expansion's type from
>>>> unsigned long long to unsigned long.
>>>>
>>>> Through the callchain init_stub_pte()->mk_pte(), the expansion of
>>>> phys_to_pfn() is (indirectly) fed into the 'phys' argument of the
>>>> pte_set_val(pte, phys, prot) macro, eventually leading to
>>>>
>>>> (pte).pte_high = (phys) >> 32;
>>>>
>>>> This results in the warning from above.
>>>>
>>>> Since UML only deals with 32 bit addresses, the upper 32 bits from 'phys'
>>>> used to be zero anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Zero out the pte value's high part in pte_set_val() in order to get rid
>>>> of the offending shift.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 16da306849d0 ("um: kill pfn_t")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/um/include/asm/page.h | 4 ++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/page.h b/arch/um/include/asm/page.h
>>>> index e13d41c..61e235f 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/um/include/asm/page.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/um/include/asm/page.h
>>>> @@ -46,8 +46,8 @@ typedef struct { unsigned long pgd; } pgd_t;
>>>> smp_wmb(); \
>>>> (to).pte_low = (from).pte_low; })
>>>> #define pte_is_zero(pte) (!((pte).pte_low & ~_PAGE_NEWPAGE) && !(pte).pte_high)
>>>> -#define pte_set_val(pte, phys, prot) \
>>>> - ({ (pte).pte_high = (phys) >> 32; \
>>>> +#define pte_set_val(pte, phys, prot) \
>>>> + ({ (pte).pte_high = 0; \
>>>> (pte).pte_low = (phys) | pgprot_val(prot); })
>>>
>>> I think we can completely kill .pte_high.
>>>
>>
>> I did a quick test with ->pte_high purged and this doesn't introduce any
>> new warnings.
>>
>> Booting w/o a rootfs works up to mount_root.
>>
>>
>> Note that an implication of getting rid of ->pte_high would be that the
>> type of pte_val() would get changed from unsigned long long to unsigned
>> long. However, outside of arch/um, pte_val() is only used here:
>> - drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vm.c
>> - include/trace/events/xen.h
>> - mm/gup.c
>> - mm/memory.c
>> All these uses and the ones in arch/um itself look compatible with this
>> change (if relevant at all for UML).
>>
>>
>> I'll post a follow up patch for this tomorrow.
>>
>> Question 1: now that ->pte_high will be gone, do you want to have
>> ->pte_low renamed to e.g. ->pte_val?
>
> So, with a freshly booted brain the story looks a bit different.
> All this code needs a cleanup and we need to check what other archs do
> before we change pte_val(). Are you ready for some research? :)
So this is what arch/x86 does:
1.) typedef a pteval_t to a type matching the underlying hardware's
native PTE size.
Examples:
- x86: arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable-2level_types.h -- unsigned long
- x86(PAE): arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable-3level_types.h -- u64
- x86_64: arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h -- unsigned long
2.) pte_t is typedefed to either a struct or union like this:
typedef struct { pteval_t pte; } pte_t;
In the case of a union (x86 and x86 w/ PAE), an additional member
'pte_low' is introduced, aliasing the low half of ->pte.
Now, all three x86-arch cases define typedef a pgprotval_t matching their
respective pteval_t type and have a common then
typedef struct pgprot { pgprotval_t pgprot; } pgprot_t;
Basically, mk_pte(page, pgprot) shifts the page's physical address to
some architecturally defined point (PAGE_SHIFT) within pteval_t and ors
the architecturally defined protection flags (_PAGE_*) in.
Of course, the protection flags are defined such that hardware
eventually finds them at the expected place within the final PTE
(c.f. arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h).
Summarizing:
The content of pteval_t is completely architecture dependent. The only
semantics on pte values defined for out-of-arch users, e.g. mm/gup.c
seems to be equality on a pte_val(pte).
Finally, the page protection flags defined for UML do not have any bit
at a position greater than 9 assigned to them
(c.g. arch/um/include/asm/pgtable.h). (If that had been the case, we had
been in trouble already because protection flags are only or'ed into
->pte_low).
Thus, under the assumption that with UML, physical addresses are always
32 bits, I would say that it is safe to change pte_t.
Proposal:
Introduce pteval_t and pgprotval_t like x86 does and do
typedef struct { pteval_t pte; } pte_t;
typedef struct pgprot { pgprotval_t pgprot; } pgprot_t;
Change the pte macros accordingly.
What about pgd_t and pmd_t?
>> Question 2: what is the smp_wmb() in pte_copy() paired with/good for?
>
> AFACT to make sure that a write to pte_high is complete before we write pte_low.
> 100% copy&pasted from arch/i386 15 years ago. ;-)
>
> Thanks,
> //richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-29 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-28 23:56 [PATCH] um: asm/page.h: zero out a pte's high value in set_pte_val() Nicolai Stange
2016-01-29 0:44 ` Richard Weinberger
2016-01-29 1:32 ` Nicolai Stange
2016-01-29 8:47 ` Richard Weinberger
2016-01-29 14:31 ` Nicolai Stange [this message]
2016-01-31 9:11 ` [uml-devel] " Richard Weinberger
2016-01-31 9:11 ` Richard Weinberger
2016-01-31 15:09 ` [PATCH v2] um: asm/page.h: remove the pte_high member from struct pte_t Nicolai Stange
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=87bn845ufn.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=nicstange@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.