From: Ross Lagerwall <ross.lagerwall@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>,
	xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Don't crash when mapping a page using EFI runtime page tables
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 13:03:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5565B282.4030705@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5565CDC9020000780007E2BF@mail.emea.novell.com>
On 05/27/2015 12:59 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 27.05.15 at 12:23, <ross.lagerwall@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 05/18/2015 03:58 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 15.05.15 at 18:08, <ross.lagerwall@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_page.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_page.c
>>>> @@ -32,20 +32,25 @@ static inline struct vcpu *mapcache_current_vcpu(void)
>>>>            return NULL;
>>>>
>>>>        /*
>>>> +     * When using efi runtime page tables, we have the equivalent of the
>> idle
>>>> +     * domain's page tables but current may point at another domain's VCPU.
>>>> +     * Return NULL as though current is not properly set up yet.
>>>> +     */
>>>> +    if ( efi_enabled && read_cr3() == efi_rs_page_table() )
>>>> +        return NULL;
>>>
>>> I'm okay with the patch in principle; what worries me is the CR3 read
>>> that is now going to be necessary even in non-debug builds. With
>>> this code being the only user of efi_rs_page_table(), I wonder if it
>>> wouldn't make sense to alter that function to return non-zero only
>>> when spin_is_locked(&efi_rs_lock), and then alter the code above
>>> such that the CR3 read would happen only when we got a non-zero
>>> value back.
>>
>> mapcache_current_vcpu() appears to be called from IRQ-enabled and
>> IRQ-disabled callers which prevents us from using the spinlock.
>
> I didn't suggest to use any spin lock; I merely suggested checking
> whether that particular one is being held by someone (to avoid the
> CR3 read if that's not the case).
spin_is_locked() calls check_lock() which causes a BUG_ON() even though 
you're not actually using the lock.
-- 
Ross Lagerwall
next prev parent reply	other threads:[~2015-05-27 12:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-15 16:08 [PATCH] x86: Don't crash when mapping a page using EFI runtime page tables Ross Lagerwall
2015-05-15 17:41 ` Andrew Cooper
2015-05-18  9:02   ` Jan Beulich
2015-05-18 10:55     ` Andrew Cooper
2015-05-18  9:12 ` Jan Beulich
2015-05-18 14:58 ` Jan Beulich
2015-05-27 10:23   ` Ross Lagerwall
2015-05-27 11:59     ` Jan Beulich
2015-05-27 12:03       ` Ross Lagerwall [this message]
2015-05-27 12:17         ` Jan Beulich
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=5565B282.4030705@citrix.com \
    --to=ross.lagerwall@citrix.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=keir@xen.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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).