From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=M8eZ=FV=lists.01.org=linux-nvdimm-bounces@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,
	URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 735B4C4361B
	for <linux-nvdimm@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:38:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1517D23719
	for <linux-nvdimm@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:38:43 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1517D23719
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org
Received: from ml01.vlan13.01.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904DA100EBB78;
	Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:38:43 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=134.134.136.126; helo=mga18.intel.com; envelope-from=ira.weiny@intel.com; receiver=<UNKNOWN> 
Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEA27100EBBD9
	for <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:38:41 -0800 (PST)
IronPort-SDR: CQXYeiAoERI3/iCLVYZk75qc2mIVV/uRafXsB9YUTg5jbfxBnUiJyFjj1GWioICdHK8ozxeb97
 RTN8emK6Ghzw==
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9837"; a="162905082"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,425,1599548400";
   d="scan'208";a="162905082"
Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65])
  by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2020 16:38:36 -0800
IronPort-SDR: NimDuO3JSSCaVpcE48OB6QWQniCI0fiXPNzekJI5l7NmE3AKdZihNJaKV633ov9z2pi3EL+dvK
 tZn+LkRliH4A==
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,425,1599548400";
   d="scan'208";a="369434314"
Received: from iweiny-desk2.sc.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.3.52.147])
  by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2020 16:38:36 -0800
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:38:36 -0800
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3.1] entry: Pass irqentry_state_t by reference
Message-ID: <20201217003835.GZ1563847@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
References: <20201106232908.364581-6-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <20201124060956.1405768-1-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <CALCETrUHwZPic89oExMMe-WyDY8-O3W68NcZvse3=PGW+iW5=w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201216013202.GY1563847@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
 <CALCETrWoh5BYnU16adT7i6tsQ77PGaLN_qyZnCy-WfO3UJoykw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrWoh5BYnU16adT7i6tsQ77PGaLN_qyZnCy-WfO3UJoykw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1 (2018-12-01)
Message-ID-Hash: TRK44RITM7JTP5HKMEKPTHMNOFYYWF7V
X-Message-ID-Hash: TRK44RITM7JTP5HKMEKPTHMNOFYYWF7V
X-MailFrom: ira.weiny@intel.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; suspicious-header
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." <linux-nvdimm.lists.01.org>
Archived-At: <https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org/message/TRK44RITM7JTP5HKMEKPTHMNOFYYWF7V/>
List-Archive: <https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org/>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-request@lists.01.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-join@lists.01.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 06:09:02PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 5:32 PM Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 02:14:28PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 10:10 PM <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > > IOW we have:
> > >
> > > struct extended_pt_regs {
> > >   bool rcu_whatever;
> > >   other generic fields here;
> > >   struct arch_extended_pt_regs arch_regs;
> > >   struct pt_regs regs;
> > > };
> > >
> > > and arch_extended_pt_regs has unsigned long pks;
> > >
> > > and instead of passing a pointer to irqentry_state_t to the generic
> > > entry/exit code, we just pass a pt_regs pointer.  And we have a little
> > > accessor like:
> > >
> > > struct extended_pt_regs *extended_regs(struct pt_regs *) { return
> > > container_of(...); }
> > >
> > > And we tell eBPF that extended_pt_regs is NOT ABI, and we will change
> > > it whenever we feel like just to keep you on your toes, thank you very
> > > much.
> > >
> > > Does this seem reasonable?
> >
> > Conceptually yes.  But I'm failing to see how this implementation can be made
> > generic for the generic fields.  The pks fields, assuming they stay x86
> > specific, would be reasonable to add in PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS.  But the
> > rcu/lockdep field is generic.  Wouldn't we have to modify every architecture to
> > add space for the rcu/lockdep bool?
> >
> > If not, where is a generic place that could be done?  Basically I'm missing how
> > the effective stack structure can look like this:
> >
> > > struct extended_pt_regs {
> > >   bool rcu_whatever;
> > >   other generic fields here;
> > >   struct arch_extended_pt_regs arch_regs;
> > >   struct pt_regs regs;
> > > };
> >
> > It seems more reasonable to make it look like:
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SUPERVISOR_PKEYS
> > struct extended_pt_regs {
> >         unsigned long pkrs;
> >         struct pt_regs regs;
> > };
> > #endif
> >
> > And leave the rcu/lockdep bool passed by value as before (still in C).
> 
> We could certainly do this,

I'm going to start with this basic support.  Because I have 0 experience in
most of these architectures.

> but we could also allocate some generic
> space.  PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS would get an extra instruction like:
> 
> subq %rsp, $GENERIC_PTREGS_SIZE
> 
> or however this should be written.  That field would be defined in
> asm-offsets.c.  And yes, all the generic-entry architectures would
> need to get onboard.

What do you mean by 'generic-entry' architectures?  I thought they all used the
generic entry code?

Regardless I would need to start another thread on this topic with any of those
architecture maintainers to see what the work load would be for this.  I don't
think I can do it on my own.

FWIW I think it is a bit unfair to hold up the PKS support in x86 for making
these generic fields part of the stack frame.  So perhaps that could be made a
follow on to the PKS series?

> 
> If we wanted to be fancy, we could split the generic area into
> initialize-to-zero and uninitialized for debugging purposes, but that
> might be more complication than is worthwhile.

Ok, agreed, but this is step 3 or 4 at the earliest.

Ira
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org

From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,
	URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FB55C1B0D8
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:39:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24CC223787
	for <linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:39:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1727808AbgLQAjS (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 16 Dec 2020 19:39:18 -0500
Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:41740 "EHLO mga03.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1727126AbgLQAjS (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 16 Dec 2020 19:39:18 -0500
IronPort-SDR: XGMrxkwFhYQpZI6EHZkhVsJOQMmV0Sw2gq+cPR67QzZ8iYbJ3cdR5tRVSZ3N6yepNaMrVuAKMv
 KYkv8gBXHyFg==
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9837"; a="175266136"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,425,1599548400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="175266136"
Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65])
  by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2020 16:38:36 -0800
IronPort-SDR: NimDuO3JSSCaVpcE48OB6QWQniCI0fiXPNzekJI5l7NmE3AKdZihNJaKV633ov9z2pi3EL+dvK
 tZn+LkRliH4A==
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,425,1599548400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="369434314"
Received: from iweiny-desk2.sc.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.3.52.147])
  by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2020 16:38:36 -0800
Date:   Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:38:36 -0800
From:   Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3.1] entry: Pass irqentry_state_t by reference
Message-ID: <20201217003835.GZ1563847@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
References: <20201106232908.364581-6-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <20201124060956.1405768-1-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <CALCETrUHwZPic89oExMMe-WyDY8-O3W68NcZvse3=PGW+iW5=w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201216013202.GY1563847@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
 <CALCETrWoh5BYnU16adT7i6tsQ77PGaLN_qyZnCy-WfO3UJoykw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrWoh5BYnU16adT7i6tsQ77PGaLN_qyZnCy-WfO3UJoykw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1 (2018-12-01)
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 06:09:02PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 5:32 PM Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 02:14:28PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 10:10 PM <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > > IOW we have:
> > >
> > > struct extended_pt_regs {
> > >   bool rcu_whatever;
> > >   other generic fields here;
> > >   struct arch_extended_pt_regs arch_regs;
> > >   struct pt_regs regs;
> > > };
> > >
> > > and arch_extended_pt_regs has unsigned long pks;
> > >
> > > and instead of passing a pointer to irqentry_state_t to the generic
> > > entry/exit code, we just pass a pt_regs pointer.  And we have a little
> > > accessor like:
> > >
> > > struct extended_pt_regs *extended_regs(struct pt_regs *) { return
> > > container_of(...); }
> > >
> > > And we tell eBPF that extended_pt_regs is NOT ABI, and we will change
> > > it whenever we feel like just to keep you on your toes, thank you very
> > > much.
> > >
> > > Does this seem reasonable?
> >
> > Conceptually yes.  But I'm failing to see how this implementation can be made
> > generic for the generic fields.  The pks fields, assuming they stay x86
> > specific, would be reasonable to add in PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS.  But the
> > rcu/lockdep field is generic.  Wouldn't we have to modify every architecture to
> > add space for the rcu/lockdep bool?
> >
> > If not, where is a generic place that could be done?  Basically I'm missing how
> > the effective stack structure can look like this:
> >
> > > struct extended_pt_regs {
> > >   bool rcu_whatever;
> > >   other generic fields here;
> > >   struct arch_extended_pt_regs arch_regs;
> > >   struct pt_regs regs;
> > > };
> >
> > It seems more reasonable to make it look like:
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SUPERVISOR_PKEYS
> > struct extended_pt_regs {
> >         unsigned long pkrs;
> >         struct pt_regs regs;
> > };
> > #endif
> >
> > And leave the rcu/lockdep bool passed by value as before (still in C).
> 
> We could certainly do this,

I'm going to start with this basic support.  Because I have 0 experience in
most of these architectures.

> but we could also allocate some generic
> space.  PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS would get an extra instruction like:
> 
> subq %rsp, $GENERIC_PTREGS_SIZE
> 
> or however this should be written.  That field would be defined in
> asm-offsets.c.  And yes, all the generic-entry architectures would
> need to get onboard.

What do you mean by 'generic-entry' architectures?  I thought they all used the
generic entry code?

Regardless I would need to start another thread on this topic with any of those
architecture maintainers to see what the work load would be for this.  I don't
think I can do it on my own.

FWIW I think it is a bit unfair to hold up the PKS support in x86 for making
these generic fields part of the stack frame.  So perhaps that could be made a
follow on to the PKS series?

> 
> If we wanted to be fancy, we could split the generic area into
> initialize-to-zero and uninitialized for debugging purposes, but that
> might be more complication than is worthwhile.

Ok, agreed, but this is step 3 or 4 at the earliest.

Ira

From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=MJ7j=FV=kvack.org=owner-linux-mm@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,
	URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9035C4361B
	for <linux-mm@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:38:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22B6623741
	for <linux-mm@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:38:40 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 22B6623741
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix)
	id 3C6446B0036; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 19:38:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40)
	id 376086B005D; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 19:38:40 -0500 (EST)
X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org
Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042)
	id 217126B0068; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 19:38:40 -0500 (EST)
X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0250.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.250])
	by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF726B0036
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 19:38:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from smtpin25.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251])
	by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C54CB181AEF0B
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:38:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-FDA: 77600913558.25.dogs55_3815a2227430
Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251])
	by smtpin25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3FDB1804E3A1
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:38:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-HE-Tag: dogs55_3815a2227430
X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5642
Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93])
	by imf38.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:38:38 +0000 (UTC)
IronPort-SDR: 6nw9HBeRwD2qgRlRHh4tqBFWL6Llh0Pg/S8ytskFWjrN8HOENKzXUtSN9nRk/8l7qe+zqhEpn2
 ORZKCZbUwoSg==
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9837"; a="171654761"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,425,1599548400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="171654761"
Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65])
  by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2020 16:38:36 -0800
IronPort-SDR: NimDuO3JSSCaVpcE48OB6QWQniCI0fiXPNzekJI5l7NmE3AKdZihNJaKV633ov9z2pi3EL+dvK
 tZn+LkRliH4A==
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,425,1599548400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="369434314"
Received: from iweiny-desk2.sc.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.3.52.147])
  by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2020 16:38:36 -0800
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:38:36 -0800
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3.1] entry: Pass irqentry_state_t by reference
Message-ID: <20201217003835.GZ1563847@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
References: <20201106232908.364581-6-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <20201124060956.1405768-1-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <CALCETrUHwZPic89oExMMe-WyDY8-O3W68NcZvse3=PGW+iW5=w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201216013202.GY1563847@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
 <CALCETrWoh5BYnU16adT7i6tsQ77PGaLN_qyZnCy-WfO3UJoykw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrWoh5BYnU16adT7i6tsQ77PGaLN_qyZnCy-WfO3UJoykw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1 (2018-12-01)
X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org
List-ID: <linux-mm.kvack.org>

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 06:09:02PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 5:32 PM Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 02:14:28PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 10:10 PM <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > > IOW we have:
> > >
> > > struct extended_pt_regs {
> > >   bool rcu_whatever;
> > >   other generic fields here;
> > >   struct arch_extended_pt_regs arch_regs;
> > >   struct pt_regs regs;
> > > };
> > >
> > > and arch_extended_pt_regs has unsigned long pks;
> > >
> > > and instead of passing a pointer to irqentry_state_t to the generic
> > > entry/exit code, we just pass a pt_regs pointer.  And we have a little
> > > accessor like:
> > >
> > > struct extended_pt_regs *extended_regs(struct pt_regs *) { return
> > > container_of(...); }
> > >
> > > And we tell eBPF that extended_pt_regs is NOT ABI, and we will change
> > > it whenever we feel like just to keep you on your toes, thank you very
> > > much.
> > >
> > > Does this seem reasonable?
> >
> > Conceptually yes.  But I'm failing to see how this implementation can be made
> > generic for the generic fields.  The pks fields, assuming they stay x86
> > specific, would be reasonable to add in PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS.  But the
> > rcu/lockdep field is generic.  Wouldn't we have to modify every architecture to
> > add space for the rcu/lockdep bool?
> >
> > If not, where is a generic place that could be done?  Basically I'm missing how
> > the effective stack structure can look like this:
> >
> > > struct extended_pt_regs {
> > >   bool rcu_whatever;
> > >   other generic fields here;
> > >   struct arch_extended_pt_regs arch_regs;
> > >   struct pt_regs regs;
> > > };
> >
> > It seems more reasonable to make it look like:
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SUPERVISOR_PKEYS
> > struct extended_pt_regs {
> >         unsigned long pkrs;
> >         struct pt_regs regs;
> > };
> > #endif
> >
> > And leave the rcu/lockdep bool passed by value as before (still in C).
> 
> We could certainly do this,

I'm going to start with this basic support.  Because I have 0 experience in
most of these architectures.

> but we could also allocate some generic
> space.  PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS would get an extra instruction like:
> 
> subq %rsp, $GENERIC_PTREGS_SIZE
> 
> or however this should be written.  That field would be defined in
> asm-offsets.c.  And yes, all the generic-entry architectures would
> need to get onboard.

What do you mean by 'generic-entry' architectures?  I thought they all used the
generic entry code?

Regardless I would need to start another thread on this topic with any of those
architecture maintainers to see what the work load would be for this.  I don't
think I can do it on my own.

FWIW I think it is a bit unfair to hold up the PKS support in x86 for making
these generic fields part of the stack frame.  So perhaps that could be made a
follow on to the PKS series?

> 
> If we wanted to be fancy, we could split the generic area into
> initialize-to-zero and uninitialized for debugging purposes, but that
> might be more complication than is worthwhile.

Ok, agreed, but this is step 3 or 4 at the earliest.

Ira