From: Leonid Yegoshin <Leonid.Yegoshin@imgtec.com>
To: James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>
Cc: <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>, <Zubair.Kakakhel@imgtec.com>,
<geert+renesas@glider.be>, <david.daney@cavium.com>,
<peterz@infradead.org>, <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
<davidlohr@hp.com>, <macro@linux-mips.org>, <chenhc@lemote.com>,
<richard@nod.at>, <zajec5@gmail.com>, <keescook@chromium.org>,
<alex@alex-smith.me.uk>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
<blogic@openwrt.org>, <jchandra@broadcom.com>,
<paul.burton@imgtec.com>, <qais.yousef@imgtec.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
<markos.chandras@imgtec.com>, <dengcheng.zhu@imgtec.com>,
<manuel.lauss@gmail.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
<lars.persson@axis.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] MIPS: Setup an instruction emulation in VDSO protected page instead of user stack
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 17:07:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5437232F.60800@imgtec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141009234044.GB4818@jhogan-linux.le.imgtec.org>
On 10/09/2014 04:40 PM, James Hogan wrote:
>
>> It may be a case for mix of FPU and MIPS R6 emulations. I just keep both
>> emulators separate as much as possible but I assume that without prove
>> it may be stackable - some rollback is needed to join both and it may
>> (probably) cause a double emulation setup - dsemul may be called twice
>> for the same pair of instructions. I didn't see that yet, honestly and
>> you may be right.
> If the only time they're used is for emulation of a branch delay slot
> instruction which should never be another branch, and signals always
> undo the emuframe before being handled (btw, should the BD bit in cause
> get set if rewinding for signal handlers/gdb?), then it stands to reason
> it should never nest.
I don't want to give a chance. If it is proved excessive, then slashing
it - 15minutes, it doesn't harm.
OK, I will spend some time to look into that, it have sense to
reconsider after unwinding signals.
>
> You could then avoid the whole stack and per-thread thing and just have
> a maximum of one emuframe dedicated to each thread or allocated on
> demand, and if there genuinely is a use case for nesting later on, worry
> about it then.
As I understand, you propose to allocate some space in mmap.
This requires a stuff to handle allocation of user space beyond VMAs.
It also may have some pain during thread creation, stopping and
subsequent cloning because that memory allocator should service that
events too and it may be not easy if emulation blocks are packed into
page. If it is not packed then it waste of user space and put additional
constraint to number of thread on single mmap.
Some cooperation with GLIBC may be needed to prevent re-use of user
address space, at a moment not sure the extent of it.
I estimated that it can be much more troubling.
>
> So long as the kernel handles a long sequence of sequential emulated
> branches gracefully (not necessarily correctly).
>
I don't understand a question. Each pair/single instruction is emulated
separately but there is some pipeline of that, even in FPU emulator, it
is just not this patch issue.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-10 0:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-09 20:00 [PATCH v2 0/3] MIPS executable stack protection Leonid Yegoshin
2014-10-09 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] MIPS: mips_flush_cache_range is added Leonid Yegoshin
2014-10-09 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] MIPS: Setup an instruction emulation in VDSO protected page instead of user stack Leonid Yegoshin
2014-10-09 22:43 ` James Hogan
2014-10-09 23:10 ` Leonid Yegoshin
2014-10-09 23:40 ` James Hogan
2014-10-10 0:07 ` Leonid Yegoshin [this message]
2014-10-10 10:03 ` James Hogan
2014-10-10 10:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-10 22:47 ` Leonid Yegoshin
2014-10-10 22:56 ` David Daney
2014-10-10 23:40 ` Leonid Yegoshin
2014-10-09 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] MIPS: set stack/data protection as non-executable Leonid Yegoshin
2014-10-09 21:42 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] MIPS executable stack protection David Daney
2014-10-09 22:18 ` Leonid Yegoshin
2014-10-09 22:28 ` Paul Burton
2014-10-09 22:59 ` David Daney
2014-10-09 23:48 ` Leonid Yegoshin
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=5437232F.60800@imgtec.com \
--to=leonid.yegoshin@imgtec.com \
--cc=Zubair.Kakakhel@imgtec.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex@alex-smith.me.uk \
--cc=blogic@openwrt.org \
--cc=chenhc@lemote.com \
--cc=david.daney@cavium.com \
--cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
--cc=dengcheng.zhu@imgtec.com \
--cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
--cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
--cc=jchandra@broadcom.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=lars.persson@axis.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
--cc=manuel.lauss@gmail.com \
--cc=markos.chandras@imgtec.com \
--cc=paul.burton@imgtec.com \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@imgtec.com \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zajec5@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).