From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@au1.ibm.com>
Cc: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: Kernel 4.15 lost set_robust_list support on POWER 9
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 08:47:03 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878tc6x0wg.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180206110616.5d1d5881@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, 06 Feb 2018 08:55:31 +1100
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@au1.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2018-02-05 at 19:14 -0200, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira wrote:
>> > Nick, Michael,
>>
>> +Aneesh.
>>
>> > On 02/05/2018 10:48 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> > > 7041 set_robust_list(0x7fff93dc3980, 24) = -1 ENOSYS (Function not
>> > > implemented)
>> >
>> > The regression was introduced by commit 371b8044 ("powerpc/64s:
>> > Initialize ISAv3 MMU registers before setting partition table").
>> >
>> > The problem is Radix MMU specific (does not occur with 'disable_radix'),
>> > and does not occur with that code reverted (ie do not set PIDR to zero).
>> >
>> > Do you see any reasons why?
>> > (wondering if at all related to access_ok() in include/asm/uaccess.h)
>
> Does this help?
>
> powerpc/64s/radix: allocate guard-PID for kernel contexts at boot
>
> 64s/radix uses PID 0 for its kernel mapping at the 0xCxxx (quadrant 3)
> address. This mapping is also accessible at 0x0xxx when PIDR=0 -- the
> top 2 bits just selects the addressing mode, which is effectively the
> same when PIDR=0 -- so address 0 translates to physical address 0 by
> the kernel's linear map.
>
> Commit 371b8044 ("powerpc/64s: Initialize ISAv3 MMU registers before
> setting partition table"), which zeroes PIDR at boot, caused this
> situation, and that stops kernel access to NULL from faulting in boot.
> Before this, we inherited what firmware or kexec gave, which is almost
> always non-zero.
>
> futex_atomic_cmpxchg detection is done in boot, by testing if it
> returns -EFAULT on a NULL address. This breaks when kernel access to
> NULL during boot does not fault.
>
> This patch allocates a non-zero guard PID for init_mm, and switches
> kernel context to the guard PID at boot. This disallows access to the
> kernel mapping from quadrant 0 at boot.
>
> The effectiveness of this protection will be diminished a little after
> boot when kernel threads inherit the last context, but those should
> have NULL guard areas, and it's possible we will actually prefer to do
> a non-lazy switch back to the guard PID in a future change. For now,
> this gives a minimal fix, and gives NULL pointer protection for boot.
I also have this as a part of another patch series. Since we already
support cmpxchg(), i would suggest we avoid the runtime check.
I needed this w.r.t hash so that we don't detect a NULL access as bad
slb address because we don't have PACA slb_addr_limit initialized
correctly that early.
commit c42b0fb10027af0c44fc9e2f6f9586203c38f99b
Author: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed Jan 24 13:54:22 2018 +0530
Don't do futext cmp test.
It access NULL address early in the boot and we want to avoid that to simplify
the fault handling.
futex_detect_cmpxchg() does a cmpxchg_futex_value_locked on a NULL user addr
to runtime detect whether architecture implements atomic cmpxchg for futex.
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype b/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype
index a429d859f15d..31bc2bd5dfd1 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype
@@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ config PPC_BOOK3S_64
select ARCH_SUPPORTS_NUMA_BALANCING
select IRQ_WORK
select HAVE_KERNEL_XZ
+ select HAVE_FUTEX_CMPXCHG if FUTEX
config PPC_BOOK3E_64
bool "Embedded processors"
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-06 3:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-05 12:48 Kernel 4.15 lost set_robust_list support on POWER 9 Florian Weimer
2018-02-05 12:59 ` Florian Weimer
2018-02-05 21:14 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
2018-02-05 21:55 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2018-02-06 1:06 ` Nicholas Piggin
2018-02-06 3:17 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2018-02-06 4:29 ` Nicholas Piggin
2018-02-06 13:17 ` Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
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=878tc6x0wg.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=benh@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.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 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).