From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] random: Initialize vsprintf's pointer hash once the random core is ready.
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:34:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YuO3xmYr/UsKxten@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YuO00GBXXNBhU4yL@alley>
On 2022-07-29 12:22:08 [+0200], Petr Mladek wrote:
> > --- a/drivers/char/random.c
> > +++ b/drivers/char/random.c
> > @@ -221,10 +222,15 @@ static void crng_reseed(void)
> > ++next_gen;
> > WRITE_ONCE(base_crng.generation, next_gen);
> > WRITE_ONCE(base_crng.birth, jiffies);
> > - if (!static_branch_likely(&crng_is_ready))
> > + if (!static_branch_likely(&crng_is_ready)) {
> > crng_init = CRNG_READY;
> > + init_hash_pointer = true;
>
> I am not familiar with the crng code. I wonder if the following would work:
>
> if (!static_branch_likely(&crng_is_ready) && crng_init != CRNG_READY) {
> crng_init = CRNG_READY;
> init_hash_pointer = true;
> }
>
> The point is that vsprintf_init_hash_pointer() will be called only by
> the first caller. It would allow to remove the @filling spin lock.
Not sure about the resulting code gen but crng_is_ready is swapped with
"crng_init == CRNG_READY" and this patch already put init_hash_pointer
in an unlikely path so it might already what you suggest.
> > + }
> > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&base_crng.lock, flags);
> > memzero_explicit(key, sizeof(key));
> > +
> > + if (init_hash_pointer)
> > + vsprintf_init_hash_pointer();
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
> > index 3c1853a9d1c09..6fa2ebb9f9b9e 100644
> > --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> > +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> > @@ -751,36 +751,30 @@ static int __init debug_boot_weak_hash_enable(char *str)
> > early_param("debug_boot_weak_hash", debug_boot_weak_hash_enable);
> >
> > static DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(filled_random_ptr_key);
> > +static siphash_key_t ptr_key __read_mostly;
> >
> > -static void enable_ptr_key_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
> > +void vsprintf_init_hash_pointer(void)
> > {
> > - static_branch_enable(&filled_random_ptr_key);
> > + static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(filling);
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + static bool filled;
> > +
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&filling, flags);
> > + if (!filled) {
> > + get_random_bytes(&ptr_key, sizeof(ptr_key));
> > + filled = true;
> > + static_branch_enable(&filled_random_ptr_key);
>
> This can't be called in an atomic context. Is crng_reseed() always
> called in a non-atomic context?
Since a "recent" change, get_random_bytes() and friends can't be called
from an explicit IRQ-off/preempt-off region. There was a little bit of
fallout on the RT side with this change including lockdep and something
else I don't recall. So two users that invoked that from an IRQ-off
region on RT which is in general not the rule and the code was altered.
This (vsprintf) popped up recently since there isn't much that uses %p.
And since printk can (and should) be invoked everywhere I would like to
keep that working.
> That said, the static branch is an overkill. vsprintf() is a slow
> path. It should be enough to use a simple boolean. It might require
> a simple memory barrier to serialize @ptr_key and the new boolean
> read&write.
I could do that if it is preferred. It was already there, this isn't
something I just added…
> > + }
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&filling, flags);
> > }
>
> Best Regards,
> Petr
Sebastian
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-29 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-29 8:52 [PATCH] random: Initialize vsprintf's pointer hash once the random core is ready Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-07-29 10:12 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-07-29 10:21 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-07-29 10:38 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-07-29 10:51 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-07-29 10:22 ` Petr Mladek
2022-07-29 10:34 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
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=YuO3xmYr/UsKxten@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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