From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:50374 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1728424AbeIGAbH (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 6 Sep 2018 20:31:07 -0400
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 21:53:51 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] Fix "x86/alternatives: Lockdep-enforce text_mutex
 in text_poke*()"
Message-ID: <20180906195351.GB9358@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20180902173224.30606-1-namit@vmware.com>
 <20180902173224.30606-2-namit@vmware.com>
 <20180906194003.GD4816@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <BD1F532F-1006-4CDC-9470-C8A91619E4DE@vmware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <BD1F532F-1006-4CDC-9470-C8A91619E4DE@vmware.com>
Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-arch.vger.kernel.org>
To: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20180906195351.LWG4shgNButRfKdADNV3izJgSeuFQzduPQNDicof75k@z>

On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 07:42:14PM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
> at 12:40 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 10:32:19AM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote:
> >> text_mutex is expected to be held before text_poke() is called, but we
> >> cannot add a lockdep assertion since kgdb does not take it, and instead
> >> *supposedly* ensures the lock is not taken and will not be acquired by
> >> any other core while text_poke() is running.
> >> 
> >> The reason for the "supposedly" comment is that it is not entirely clear
> >> that this would be the case if gdb_do_roundup is zero.
> > 
> > Argh, that's pretty shit code...
> > 
> > Not only is that text_mutex abuse ugly, so too is the fixmap usage from
> > IRQ context. I suppose this really does require your alternative mm
> > patches for text_poke().
> 
> Right, I forgot about that…

With that CR3 trickery, we can rid ourselves of the text_mutex
requirement, since concurrent text_poke is 'safe'. That would clean up
the kgdb code quite a bit.