lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jan]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm/mmu_notifier: restore set_pte_at_notify semantics
On 22/01/2014 15:10, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 11:40:34AM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>> Commit 6bdb913f0a70a4dfb7f066fb15e2d6f960701d00 (mm: wrap calls to
>> set_pte_at_notify with invalidate_range_start and invalidate_range_end)
>> breaks semantics of set_pte_at_notify. When calls to set_pte_at_notify
>> are wrapped with mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and
>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end, KVM zaps pte during
>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start callback and set_pte_at_notify has
>> no spte to update and therefore it's called for nothing.
>>
>> As Andrea suggested (1), the problem is resolved by calling
>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_page after PT lock has been released and only
>> for mmu_notifiers that do not implement change_ptr callback.
>>
>> (1) http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/111710/focus=111711
>>
>> Reported-by: Izik Eidus <izik.eidus@ravellosystems.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <mike.rapoport@ravellosystems.com>
>> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Haggai Eran <haggaie@mellanox.com>
>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
>> ---
>> include/linux/mmu_notifier.h | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> kernel/events/uprobes.c | 12 ++++++------
>> mm/ksm.c | 15 +++++----------
>> mm/memory.c | 14 +++++---------
>> mm/mmu_notifier.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> 5 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> Reviewed-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
>

Hi Andrea, Mike,

Did you get a chance to consider the scenario I wrote about in the other
thread?

I'm worried about the following scenario:

Given a read-only page, suppose one host thread (thread 1) writes to
that page, and performs COW, but before it calls the
mmu_notifier_invalidate_page_if_missing_change_pte function another host
thread (thread 2) writes to the same page (this time without a page
fault). Then we have a valid entry in the secondary page table to a
stale page, and someone (thread 3) may read stale data from there.

Here's a diagram that shows this scenario:

Thread 1 | Thread 2 | Thread 3
========================================================================
do_wp_page(page 1) | |
... | |
set_pte_at_notify | |
... | write to page 1 |
| | stale access
pte_unmap_unlock | |
invalidate_page_if_missing_change_pte | |

This is currently prevented by the use of the range start and range end
notifiers.

Do you agree that this scenario is possible with the new patch, or am I
missing something?

Regards,
Haggai



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-01-22 15:21    [W:0.031 / U:3.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site