All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>,
	"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
	Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
	"H. J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromiun.org>,
	Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
	"Shanbhogue, Vedvyas" <vedvyas.shanbhogue@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 12/24] x86/mm: Modify ptep_set_wrprotect and pmdp_set_wrprotect for _PAGE_DIRTY_SW
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 10:46:51 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALCETrUE6mY-+YCaJjGJuEqE_OBQc=QUR1XMnPW9VwTb8=HK4w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e164a320-25a4-a9fc-3256-901b778468f3@linux.intel.com>

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Dave Hansen
<dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 08/30/2018 10:34 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> But, to keep B's TLB from picking up the entry, I think we can just make
>>> it !Present for a moment.  No TLB can cache it, and I believe the same
>>> "don't set Dirty on a !Writable entry" logic also holds for !Present
>>> (modulo a weird erratum or two).
>> Can we get documentation?  Pretty please?
>
> The accessed bit description in the SDM looks pretty good to me today:
>
>> Whenever the processor uses a paging-structure entry as part of
>> linear-address translation, it sets the accessed flag in that entry
>> (if it is not already set).
> If it's !Present, it can't used as part of a translation so can't be
> set.  I think that covers the thing I was unsure about.
>
> But, Dirty is a bit, er, muddier, but mostly because it only gets set on
> leaf entries:
>
>> Whenever there is a write to a linear address, the processor sets the
>> dirty flag (if it is not already set) in the paging- structure entry
>> that identifies the final physical address for the linear address
>> (either a PTE or a paging-structure entry in which the PS flag is
>> 1).
>
> That little hunk will definitely need to get updated with something like:
>
>         On processors enumerating support for CET, the processor will on
>         set the dirty flag on paging structure entries in which the W
>         flag is 1.

Can we get something much stronger, perhaps?  Like this:

On processors enumerating support for CET, the processor will write to
the accessed and/or dirty flags atomically, as if using the LOCK
CMPXCHG instruction.  The memory access, any cached entries in any
paging-structure caches, and the values in the paging-structure entry
before and after writing the A and/or D bits will all be consistent.

I'm sure this could be worded better.  The point is that the CPU
should, atomically, load the PTE, check if it allows the access, set A
and/or D appropriately, write the new value to the TLB, and use that
value for the access.  This is clearly a little bit slower than what
old CPUs could do when writing to an already-in-TLB writable non-dirty
entry, but new CPUs are going to have to atomically check the W bit.
(I assume that even old CPUs will *atomically* set the D bit as if by
LOCK BTS, but this is all very vague in the SDM IIRC.)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
	Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
	"H. J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromiun.org>,
	Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Pavel
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 12/24] x86/mm: Modify ptep_set_wrprotect and pmdp_set_wrprotect for _PAGE_DIRTY_SW
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 10:46:51 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALCETrUE6mY-+YCaJjGJuEqE_OBQc=QUR1XMnPW9VwTb8=HK4w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e164a320-25a4-a9fc-3256-901b778468f3@linux.intel.com>

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Dave Hansen
<dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 08/30/2018 10:34 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> But, to keep B's TLB from picking up the entry, I think we can just make
>>> it !Present for a moment.  No TLB can cache it, and I believe the same
>>> "don't set Dirty on a !Writable entry" logic also holds for !Present
>>> (modulo a weird erratum or two).
>> Can we get documentation?  Pretty please?
>
> The accessed bit description in the SDM looks pretty good to me today:
>
>> Whenever the processor uses a paging-structure entry as part of
>> linear-address translation, it sets the accessed flag in that entry
>> (if it is not already set).
> If it's !Present, it can't used as part of a translation so can't be
> set.  I think that covers the thing I was unsure about.
>
> But, Dirty is a bit, er, muddier, but mostly because it only gets set on
> leaf entries:
>
>> Whenever there is a write to a linear address, the processor sets the
>> dirty flag (if it is not already set) in the paging- structure entry
>> that identifies the final physical address for the linear address
>> (either a PTE or a paging-structure entry in which the PS flag is
>> 1).
>
> That little hunk will definitely need to get updated with something like:
>
>         On processors enumerating support for CET, the processor will on
>         set the dirty flag on paging structure entries in which the W
>         flag is 1.

Can we get something much stronger, perhaps?  Like this:

On processors enumerating support for CET, the processor will write to
the accessed and/or dirty flags atomically, as if using the LOCK
CMPXCHG instruction.  The memory access, any cached entries in any
paging-structure caches, and the values in the paging-structure entry
before and after writing the A and/or D bits will all be consistent.

I'm sure this could be worded better.  The point is that the CPU
should, atomically, load the PTE, check if it allows the access, set A
and/or D appropriately, write the new value to the TLB, and use that
value for the access.  This is clearly a little bit slower than what
old CPUs could do when writing to an already-in-TLB writable non-dirty
entry, but new CPUs are going to have to atomically check the W bit.
(I assume that even old CPUs will *atomically* set the D bit as if by
LOCK BTS, but this is all very vague in the SDM IIRC.)

  reply	other threads:[~2018-08-31 17:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 167+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-30 14:38 [RFC PATCH v3 00/24] Control Flow Enforcement: Shadow Stack Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 01/24] x86/cpufeatures: Add CPUIDs for Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET) Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 02/24] x86/fpu/xstate: Change some names to separate XSAVES system and user states Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 03/24] x86/fpu/xstate: Enable XSAVES system states Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 04/24] x86/fpu/xstate: Add XSAVES system states for shadow stack Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 05/24] Documentation/x86: Add CET description Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 20:39   ` Pavel Machek
2018-08-30 20:39     ` Pavel Machek
2018-08-30 22:49     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 22:49       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 22:49       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 21:17     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 21:17       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 21:17       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-03  2:56   ` Randy Dunlap
2018-09-03  2:56     ` Randy Dunlap
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 06/24] x86/cet: Control protection exception handler Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 15:01   ` Jann Horn
2018-08-31 15:01     ` Jann Horn
2018-08-31 16:20     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 16:20       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 16:20       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 07/24] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode shadow stack Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 08/24] mm: Introduce VM_SHSTK for shadow stack memory Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 09/24] x86/mm: Change _PAGE_DIRTY to _PAGE_DIRTY_HW Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 10/24] x86/mm: Introduce _PAGE_DIRTY_SW Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 11/24] drm/i915/gvt: Update _PAGE_DIRTY to _PAGE_DIRTY_BITS Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 12/24] x86/mm: Modify ptep_set_wrprotect and pmdp_set_wrprotect for _PAGE_DIRTY_SW Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 15:49   ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 15:49     ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 16:02     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 16:02       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 16:02       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 16:08     ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-30 16:08       ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-30 16:23       ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 16:23         ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 17:19         ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-30 17:19           ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-30 17:26           ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 17:26             ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 17:26             ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 17:33             ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-30 17:33               ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-30 17:54               ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 17:54                 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 17:54                 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 17:59                 ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 17:59                   ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 20:21                   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 20:21                     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 20:21                     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 20:44                     ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 20:44                       ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 20:52                       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 20:52                         ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 20:52                         ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 21:01                         ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 21:01                           ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 21:47                           ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 21:47                             ` Jann Horn
2018-08-31  9:53                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-31  9:53                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-31 14:33                               ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 14:33                                 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 14:33                                 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 14:47                                 ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-31 14:47                                   ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-31 15:48                                   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 15:48                                     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 15:48                                     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 15:58                                     ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-31 15:58                                       ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-31 16:29                                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-31 16:29                                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-14 20:39                                         ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 20:39                                           ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 20:39                                           ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 20:46                                           ` Dave Hansen
2018-09-14 20:46                                             ` Dave Hansen
2018-09-14 20:46                                             ` Dave Hansen
2018-09-14 21:08                                             ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 21:08                                               ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 21:08                                               ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 21:33                                               ` Dave Hansen
2018-09-14 21:33                                                 ` Dave Hansen
2018-09-14 21:33                                                 ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-31  1:23                   ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-08-31  1:23                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-08-30 17:34           ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-08-30 17:34             ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-08-30 18:55             ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-30 18:55               ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-31 17:46               ` Andy Lutomirski [this message]
2018-08-31 17:46                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-08-31 17:52                 ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-31 17:52                   ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-31 17:52                   ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-30 19:59   ` Randy Dunlap
2018-08-30 19:59     ` Randy Dunlap
2018-08-30 20:23     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 20:23       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 20:23       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 16:29   ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-31 16:29     ` Dave Hansen
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 13/24] x86/mm: Shadow stack page fault error checking Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 14/24] mm: Handle shadow stack page fault Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 15/24] mm: Handle THP/HugeTLB " Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 16/24] mm: Update can_follow_write_pte/pmd for shadow stack Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 17/24] mm: Introduce do_mmap_locked() Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 18/24] x86/cet/shstk: User-mode shadow stack support Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 16:10   ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 16:10     ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 16:20     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 16:20       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 16:20       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 19/24] x86/cet/shstk: Introduce WRUSS instruction Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:38   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 15:39   ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 15:39     ` Jann Horn
2018-08-30 15:55     ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-08-30 15:55       ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-08-30 16:22       ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 16:22         ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 16:22         ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 21:49         ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 21:49           ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 21:49           ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-31 22:16           ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-08-31 22:16             ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-09-14 20:46             ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 20:46               ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-14 20:46               ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39 ` [RFC PATCH v3 20/24] x86/cet/shstk: Signal handling for shadow stack Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39 ` [RFC PATCH v3 21/24] x86/cet/shstk: ELF header parsing of Shadow Stack Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39 ` [RFC PATCH v3 22/24] x86/cet/shstk: Handle thread shadow stack Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39 ` [RFC PATCH v3 23/24] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for Shadow Stack Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39 ` [RFC PATCH v3 24/24] x86/cet/shstk: Add Shadow Stack instructions to opcode map Yu-cheng Yu
2018-08-30 14:39   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-02  8:13 ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/24] Control Flow Enforcement: Shadow Stack Balbir Singh
2018-09-02  8:13   ` Balbir Singh
2018-09-04 14:47   ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-04 14:47     ` Yu-cheng Yu
2018-09-04 14:47     ` Yu-cheng Yu

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='CALCETrUE6mY-+YCaJjGJuEqE_OBQc=QUR1XMnPW9VwTb8=HK4w@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
    --cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromiun.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vedvyas.shanbhogue@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yu-cheng.yu@intel.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.