From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f173.google.com (mail-pl1-f173.google.com [209.85.214.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DF872F55 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 03:22:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710300131; cv=none; b=Pk528Wu8FPfGNaFb2qRkgddsojln4hVRPVD5zSvx7iygqcaXnnZiR7EApt9/BPjI9GebrvAub11kufqKvRwzWznezi28lOR8pzpipMaMMNC7OSsf37SiRyeu1yvFsKuszz9BAPG5Ti2SRH3HDNvAd+zSpprH/6Xd++JBIlf2aAw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710300131; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WvRl61h3ByfZ0HysVdiQuStQNgkNDHIT84WHFO+RzTw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=JN+8TqMSG9J+cVuUVgQOkMKbymg7jCJnl4biA9Hi2o9rVIyOkU36BSzTYyNT6rR49UOTZ+wViLAWn91TfuxsEpY34Pcy0kkDtiA+mko0WGmxpMxpnl2iTz6/YuFNfbHUp8D5rwsrXOe6NndIMJ8JBqVK4IM4Hp9+7mtMxxxfgkE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=rivosinc.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rivosinc.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rivosinc-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@rivosinc-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b=D6R7ZJ6o; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=rivosinc.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rivosinc.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rivosinc-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@rivosinc-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b="D6R7ZJ6o" Received: by mail-pl1-f173.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1dc3b4b9b62so2867245ad.1 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:22:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rivosinc-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1710300129; x=1710904929; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=qrBUCaeV/dwaHFNXHKFwRp9ZoTbxAso4k6A0KIx30Kw=; b=D6R7ZJ6op4dtE0foDJ91RypEUmJoE0bdR1AqhxjgCYkAzKYMziC46vQUymW0Xi4XVL BkKH1bfxpfEe+liwrYMD17ZpDa3vrhXK6Wztk/0mp5sJkn78SWwz4DJ4Lg6LGA7OvUTo e9rdjNBCpTjebxkbD7PZlLV9KLR4qn5mttG8x/nPiz8ZtXAZmGI+qxA41+XErytX6QX6 9NZIXgJChKuSmws6JgOYe6zT+eVH6cezV5ie6fzs/vhlcXG99cFSQ6wQT/WHvTNRWupl 5nImAWuOc5s+86NBt9+TIbAM9djraCg13K9ir4ujbIzl0gIJ1e+DIWHNalaqds1o/Nbr wN+g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1710300129; x=1710904929; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=qrBUCaeV/dwaHFNXHKFwRp9ZoTbxAso4k6A0KIx30Kw=; b=cng7vLrNePci3E2sWGbqUrQ4WGHsYQ0xh8LE/Wu9r0Vi44qhQTlgMbmrGX47OHjYV7 +QJVOcV07XBb2LirzwkQzJyIsyYnDMlII+DlwoLLG/Z0q6a+mwkfEHS+3iFCjLh5i9DP w2GBVaV9Z2UMwSKhQvfTvYQIUd/wIJGp4d8LBL8qkmUeSvSS9jWhDzRY9dQOQW53lLbz GgLTsHOs4HxK6kwV27E7hyMF6kuVtx/CO3uCSkJ8wlzU2SYzaZ3HC3twarvYtYYpSQYf QFZ2docaF0xUsc4+05EU8qIyieJVXY0vSzW/0R4RGxGjj30XaG1aufbXt3wRL3L0xDpk vaMA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUVFcQRG6IuTFx15UuRrwdKieWt/Hdl3iced+DlOeJQjIBJ7TVrmbsQYGsS7jju4VLFlEe1fcYUabY5pmweBudFmO57vhz1 X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwL5IfkEOxlwyTjHn0d6mVOvfy97mgFPeg4zYceqTzQ14W5Havp ktiM2MPOT35n7vOFtWJTr3wLHGpwgeVmyYRDmKz+Qqk5N8rmxpYp/JoyRAHGBMU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFKhNUh1ZNzl325ce9f/jj/4HvlL+NSmK1isj6lq+0XGv0m2rrdpwNhKz7ZPF9fQSmUeSmvTA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:1c3:b0:1dd:8a51:7b49 with SMTP id e3-20020a17090301c300b001dd8a517b49mr2048372plh.15.1710300128657; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:22:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ghost ([2601:647:5700:6860:733c:479a:4b7b:f77b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b21-20020a170902ed1500b001d9a42f6183sm7466890pld.45.2024.03.12.20.22.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:22:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:22:06 -0700 From: Charlie Jenkins To: Samuel Holland Cc: Palmer Dabbelt , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: Fix spurious errors from __get/put_kernel_nofault Message-ID: References: <20240312022030.320789-1-samuel.holland@sifive.com> <06ebe952-c872-4406-bcb9-00b0b892fb6c@sifive.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <06ebe952-c872-4406-bcb9-00b0b892fb6c@sifive.com> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 10:05:37PM -0500, Samuel Holland wrote: > On 2024-03-12 9:53 PM, Charlie Jenkins wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 07:19:13PM -0700, Samuel Holland wrote: > >> These macros did not initialize __kr_err, so they could fail even if > >> the access did not fault. > >> > >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > >> Fixes: d464118cdc41 ("riscv: implement __get_kernel_nofault and __put_user_nofault") > >> Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland > >> --- > >> Found while testing the unaligned access speed series[1]. The observed > >> behavior was that with RISCV_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y, the > >> copy_from_kernel_nofault() in prepend_copy() failed every time when > >> filling out /proc/self/mounts, so all of the mount points were "xxx". > >> > >> I'm surprised this hasn't been seen before. For reference, I'm compiling > >> with clang 18. > >> > >> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20240308-disable_misaligned_probe_config-v9-0-a388770ba0ce@rivosinc.com/ > >> > >> arch/riscv/include/asm/uaccess.h | 4 ++-- > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/uaccess.h > >> index ec0cab9fbddd..72ec1d9bd3f3 100644 > >> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/uaccess.h > >> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/uaccess.h > >> @@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ unsigned long __must_check clear_user(void __user *to, unsigned long n) > >> > >> #define __get_kernel_nofault(dst, src, type, err_label) \ > >> do { \ > >> - long __kr_err; \ > >> + long __kr_err = 0; \ > >> \ > >> __get_user_nocheck(*((type *)(dst)), (type *)(src), __kr_err); \ > >> if (unlikely(__kr_err)) \ > >> @@ -328,7 +328,7 @@ do { \ > >> > >> #define __put_kernel_nofault(dst, src, type, err_label) \ > >> do { \ > >> - long __kr_err; \ > >> + long __kr_err = 0; \ > >> \ > >> __put_user_nocheck(*((type *)(src)), (type *)(dst), __kr_err); \ > >> if (unlikely(__kr_err)) \ > >> -- > >> 2.43.1 > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> linux-riscv mailing list > >> linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv > > > > I am not able to reproduce this using Clang 18 with > > RISCV_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y on 6.8. However I can see how this > > could be an issue. > > > > Going down the rabbit hold of macros here, I end up at > > arch/riscv/include/asm/asm-extable.h where the register that hold 'err' > > is written into the __ex_table section: > > > > #define EX_DATA_REG(reg, gpr) \ > > "((.L__gpr_num_" #gpr ") << " __stringify(EX_DATA_REG_##reg##_SHIFT) ")" > > > > #define _ASM_EXTABLE_UACCESS_ERR_ZERO(insn, fixup, err, zero) \ > > __DEFINE_ASM_GPR_NUMS \ > > __ASM_EXTABLE_RAW(#insn, #fixup, \ > > __stringify(EX_TYPE_UACCESS_ERR_ZERO), \ > > "(" \ > > EX_DATA_REG(ERR, err) " | " \ > > EX_DATA_REG(ZERO, zero) \ > > ")") > > > > I am wondering if setting this value to zero solves the problem by > > hiding another issue. It seems like this shouldn't need to be > > initialized to zero, however I am lost as to how this extable setup > > works so perhaps this is the proper solution. > > extable works by running the handler (selected by EX_TYPE_*) if some exception > occurs while executing that instruction -- see the calls to fixup_exception() in > fault.c and traps.c. If there is no exception, then the handler does not run, > and the err register is not written by ex_handler_uaccess_err_zero(). Hmm okay I understand thank you for explaining that. It's interesting to me that in __get_user_asm 'err' is set as a read/write variable even though __get_user_asm doesn't write to it. However, it seems like changing it to a write-only variable the compiler incorrectly optimizes err, and the kernel fails to boot. > > If you look at __get_user_asm(), you can see that the err register is not > touched by the assembly code at all -- the only reference to %0 is in the > extable entry. So if the macro that declares the error variable doesn't > initialize it, nothing will. Reviewed-by: Charlie Jenkins > > Compare __get_user() and __put_user() which do initialize their error variable. > > Regards, > Samuel >