On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 05:36 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Oct 2005, James Bottomley wrote:
> > The change does slightly worry me in that it alters the behaviour of
> > flush_cache_page() because now it checks the pfn whereas previously it
> > didn't. This means that previously we would flush the COW'd page of a
> > shared mapping, now we won't.
>
> Perhaps you're thinking of some use of flush_cache_page that no longer
> exists in the tree? All the uses I see are passing in the right pfn,
> and the question is why translation_exists even gets called by it.
No, just verifying that we won't get tripped up by the pfn test in the
one case where we didn't do it previously.
translation_exists() is just an optimisation in flush_cache_page(). If
there's no pte, we can't do an effective flush, so instead of relying on
flush instruction nullification to achieve the nop, we just call
transation_exists() to do the check for us.
> Even those uses of flush_cache_page in asm-parisc/cacheflush.h itself
> (which I'd missed before): copy_to_user_page and copy_from_user_page
> are only used by nothing but access_process_vm, after get_user_pages:
> so any COW has already been done, and the right pfn is passed in.
OK, so the patch should be fine then.
> > > I'm right, aren't I? that the previous pte_none test was actually letting
> > > through swap entries and pte_file entries which might look as if they had
> > > the right pfn, just by coincidence of their offsets? So flush_dcache_page
> > > would stop, thinking it had done a good flush, when actually it hadn't.
> >
> > Actually, no, pte_none() on parisc is either pte is zero or _PAGE_FLUSH
> > (which is our private flag saying we're preserving the pte entry for the
> > purposes of flushing even though it's gone) is set.
>
> Sorry, "pte_none test" was my lazy shorthand for the actual test:
> if(pte_none(*pte) && ((pte_val(*pte) & _PAGE_FLUSH) == 0))
> return NULL;
> from which point on it assumes the pte is valid. I'm contending that
> a swap entry or pte_file entry does not return NULL there, so is then
> treated as a valid pte: and pte_pfn on it might match the target pfn.
OK, I see, yes, we could have had this problem.
> I believe my
> /* Filter out coincidental file entries and swap entries */
> if (!(pte_val(pte) & (_PAGE_FLUSH|_PAGE_PRESENT)))
> return 0;
> is correct, and avoids that problem (plus avoiding the complication
> of parisc's unintuitive pte_none).
Yes, it should.
> > However, now that I
> > look at it, are you thinking our ptep_get_and_clear() should be doing a
> > check for _PAGE_PRESENT before it sets _PAGE_FLUSH?
>
> That's certainly not what I was thinking. No, I'm pretty sure that
> ptep_get_and_clear only gets called when we've got the right lock and
> know the pte is present: I don't think you need to make any change there.
> (The "pretty sure" reflecting that there's a bit of a macro maze here now,
> so actually following up each reference would take a bit longer.)
>
> But you may be seeing something I don't see: I've only just met your
> _PAGE_FLUSH, and that unusual pte_none might be letting something
> through that I'm overlooking, that you're aware of.
Actually, I think what we need to ascertain is whether _PAGE_FLUSH is
still necessary. A long time ago, Linux would do stupid things like
clear the page table entry and then flush (which is legal on PIPT
architectures like x86). If it's no longer doing that then we no-longer
need to worry about _PAGE_FLUSH.
> > > But races remain: the pte good at the moment translation_exists checks it,
> > > may have been taken out by kswapd a moment later (flush_dcache_mmap_lock
> > > only secures the vma_prio_tree structure, not ptes within the vmas);
> > > or it may have been COWed in the interval; or zapped from the mm.
> > >
> > > Can you get a success code out of __flush_cache_page? Or perhaps you
> > > should run translation_exists a second time after the __flush_cache_page,
> > > to check nothing changed (the pte pointer would then be helpful, to save
> > > descending a second time)? Or perhaps it all works out, that any such
> > > change which might occur, itself does the __flush_cache_page you need?
> >
> > Yes, I know ... I never liked the volatility of this, but it's better
> > than what was there before, believe me (previously we just flushed the
> > first entry we found regardless).
>
> I do believe you!
>
> > Getting a return code out of __flush_dcache_page() is hard because it
> > doesn't know if the tlb miss handler nullified the instructions it's
> > trying to execute; and they're interruption handlers (meaning we don't
> > push anything on the stack for them, they run in shadow registers), so
> > getting a return code out of them is next to impossible.
>
> Right, it was just a thought.
>
> > For the flush to be effective in the VIPT cache, we have to have a
> > virtual address with a valid translation that points to the correct
> > physical address. I suppose we could flush through the tmpalias space
> > instead. That's where we set up an artifical translation that's not the
> > actual vaddr but instead is congruent to the vaddr so the mapping is
> > effective in cache aliasing terms. Our congruence boundary is 4MB, so
> > we set up a private (per cpu) 4MB space (tmpalias) where we can set up
> > our pte's (or actually manufacture them in the tlb miss handler)
> > securely.
>
> I have no appreciation at all how that would compare. On the one hand
> it sounds like a lot of overhead you'd understandably prefer to avoid;
> on the other hand, this hit-and-miss search of the vma_prio_tree might
> be a worse overhead better avoided. I've no appreciation at all.
Well ... it appeals because we could now implement flush_dcache_page()
without walking the vmas. All we need is the offset (because vm_start
is always congruent) which we can work out from the page->index, so we
never need any locking.
> But I made two suggestions above that might be less work. One,
> requiring no work but research, that _perhaps_ in all the racy cases
> you can rely on the __flush_cache_page having been done by the racer?
> I can't tell, and it may be obvious to you that that's a non-starter.
Yes, that, theoretically, is correct. Any flush at that address to user
space affects all the mappings, whether it's done by clearing the pte or
by us in flush_dcache_page().
> Other, that you just check the pte again after the __flush_cache_page,
> if it's no longer right then assume the flush didn't work and continue.
> There is a small chance that the pte was right before, wrong during the
> flush, then right after (something else faulted it back in, while we
> were away... I was about to say handling an interrupt, but actually
> even interrupts are disabled here by flush_dcache_mmap_lock, since
> that's a reuse of mapping->tree_lock). But it would improve the
> safety by several orders of magnitude.
No ... we'll go with the racer already did it theory, I think ...
James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
