From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>,
Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] mm: Add fault_in_subpage_writeable() to probe at sub-page granularity
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 16:49:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220423164913.3f0c92f7ad6ec718ea7c0360@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220423100751.1870771-2-catalin.marinas@arm.com>
On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 11:07:49 +0100 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
> On hardware with features like arm64 MTE or SPARC ADI, an access fault
> can be triggered at sub-page granularity. Depending on how the
> fault_in_writeable() function is used, the caller can get into a
> live-lock by continuously retrying the fault-in on an address different
> from the one where the uaccess failed.
>
> In the majority of cases progress is ensured by the following
> conditions:
>
> 1. copy_to_user_nofault() guarantees at least one byte access if the
> user address is not faulting.
>
> 2. The fault_in_writeable() loop is resumed from the first address that
> could not be accessed by copy_to_user_nofault().
>
> If the loop iteration is restarted from an earlier (initial) point, the
> loop is repeated with the same conditions and it would live-lock.
>
> Introduce an arch-specific probe_subpage_writeable() and call it from
> the newly added fault_in_subpage_writeable() function. The arch code
> with sub-page faults will have to implement the specific probing
> functionality.
>
> Note that no other fault_in_subpage_*() functions are added since they
> have no callers currently susceptible to a live-lock.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/include/linux/uaccess.h
> +++ b/include/linux/uaccess.h
> @@ -231,6 +231,28 @@ static inline bool pagefault_disabled(void)
> */
> #define faulthandler_disabled() (pagefault_disabled() || in_atomic())
>
> +#ifndef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SUBPAGE_FAULTS
> +
> +/**
> + * probe_subpage_writeable: probe the user range for write faults at sub-page
> + * granularity (e.g. arm64 MTE)
> + * @uaddr: start of address range
> + * @size: size of address range
> + *
> + * Returns 0 on success, the number of bytes not probed on fault.
> + *
> + * It is expected that the caller checked for the write permission of each
> + * page in the range either by put_user() or GUP. The architecture port can
> + * implement a more efficient get_user() probing if the same sub-page faults
> + * are triggered by either a read or a write.
> + */
> +static inline size_t probe_subpage_writeable(void __user *uaddr, size_t size)
It's `char __user *' at the other definition.
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#endif /* CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SUBPAGE_FAULTS */
> +
> #ifndef ARCH_HAS_NOCACHE_UACCESS
>
> ...
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-23 23:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-23 10:07 [PATCH v4 0/3] Avoid live-lock in btrfs fault-in+uaccess loop Catalin Marinas
2022-04-23 10:07 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] mm: Add fault_in_subpage_writeable() to probe at sub-page granularity Catalin Marinas
2022-04-23 23:49 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2022-04-23 10:07 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] arm64: Add support for user sub-page fault probing Catalin Marinas
2022-04-23 10:07 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] btrfs: Avoid live-lock in search_ioctl() on hardware with sub-page faults Catalin Marinas
2022-04-23 16:35 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] Avoid live-lock in btrfs fault-in+uaccess loop Linus Torvalds
2022-04-23 18:40 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-04-25 11:08 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2022-04-25 16:13 ` Catalin Marinas
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=20220423164913.3f0c92f7ad6ec718ea7c0360@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=agruenba@redhat.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=will@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).