From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] x86/fpu: set PKRU state for kernel threads
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 09:44:18 +0200
Message-ID: <2fe82232-4e80-8317-757c-d2235c4633d8@redhat.com>
References: <20181004140547.13014-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
 <20181004140547.13014-6-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
 <39e0a55f-4920-cfde-9bef-09c51109d211@linux.intel.com>
 <CALCETrUdxsFA5g0M9uRFktfdi=mxK_g3kBfs-VxwDZ0xWqjFAQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181018162644.qqjkzoqn2fleyi2b@linutronix.de>
 <CC7B46F7-7A6E-4CAF-A1EB-91271CC7B092@amacapital.net>
 <20181018182538.vgotfpsdy7qxl2tg@linutronix.de>
 <CALCETrVjEOkNhdyAF10PaYi_rnFUWKRqPhLRCq3ZV=gxQFETxg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrVjEOkNhdyAF10PaYi_rnFUWKRqPhLRCq3ZV=gxQFETxg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On 18/10/2018 22:46, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> [0] drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_fs.c::ffs_user_copy_worker()
>>
>> Sebastian
> I think we need an entirely new API:
> 
> user_mm_ctx_t ctx = user_mm_ctx_get();
> 
> ...
> 
> use_user_mm_ctx(ctx);
> unuse_user_mm_ctx(ctx);
> 
> ...
> 
> user_mm_ctx_put(ctx);
> 
> and ctx will store a copy of mm and PKRU.
> 

That looks like a good API in general.  The ffs_user_copy_worker that
Sebastian mentioned seems to be used by AIO, in which case of course it
has to happen in a kernel thread.

But while the API is good, deciding on the desired semantics is
"interesting".  The submitting thread might be changing PKRU between the
time the I/O operation is submitted and the time it is completed, for
example.  You could look up the task's PKRU at use_mm time, except that
the task might have disappeared...  In the end just using PKRU=0 makes
some sense and it only should be documented that some kernel services
will ignore PKRU.

Paolo