From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com>, x86@kernel.org
Cc: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
Gayatri Kammela <gayatri.kammela@intel.com>,
Zeng Guang <guang.zeng@intel.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Randy E Witt <randy.e.witt@intel.com>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
Ramesh Thomas <ramesh.thomas@intel.com>,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 06/13] x86/uintr: Introduce uintr receiver syscalls
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 01:52:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87czoyg88k.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210913200132.3396598-7-sohil.mehta@intel.com>
On Mon, Sep 13 2021 at 13:01, Sohil Mehta wrote:
> +/* User Posted Interrupt Descriptor (UPID) */
> +struct uintr_upid {
> + struct {
> + u8 status; /* bit 0: ON, bit 1: SN, bit 2-7: reserved */
> + u8 reserved1; /* Reserved */
> + u8 nv; /* Notification vector */
> + u8 reserved2; /* Reserved */
> + u32 ndst; /* Notification destination */
> + } nc __packed; /* Notification control */
> + u64 puir; /* Posted user interrupt requests */
> +} __aligned(64);
> +
> +/* UPID Notification control status */
> +#define UPID_ON 0x0 /* Outstanding notification */
> +#define UPID_SN 0x1 /* Suppressed notification */
Come on. This are bits in upid.status, right? So why can't the comment
above these defines says so and why can't the names not reflect that?
> +struct uintr_upid_ctx {
> + struct uintr_upid *upid;
> + refcount_t refs;
Please use tabular format for struct members.
> +};
> +
> +struct uintr_receiver {
> + struct uintr_upid_ctx *upid_ctx;
> +};
So we need a struct to wrap a pointer to another struct. Why?
> +inline bool uintr_arch_enabled(void)
What's this arch_enabled indirection for? Is this used anywhere in
non-architecture code?
> +{
> + return static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_UINTR);
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool is_uintr_receiver(struct task_struct *t)
> +{
> + return !!t->thread.ui_recv;
> +}
> +
> +static inline u32 cpu_to_ndst(int cpu)
> +{
> + u32 apicid = (u32)apic->cpu_present_to_apicid(cpu);
> +
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(apicid == BAD_APICID);
Brilliant. If x2apic is not enabled then this case returns
> + if (!x2apic_enabled())
> + return (apicid << 8) & 0xFF00;
(BAD_APICID << 8) & 0xFF00 == 0xFF ....
> +int do_uintr_unregister_handler(void)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *t = current;
> + struct fpu *fpu = &t->thread.fpu;
> + struct uintr_receiver *ui_recv;
> + u64 msr64;
> +
> + if (!is_uintr_receiver(t))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + pr_debug("recv: Unregister handler and clear MSRs for task=%d\n",
> + t->pid);
> +
> + /*
> + * TODO: Evaluate usage of fpregs_lock() and get_xsave_addr(). Bugs
> + * have been reported recently for PASID and WRPKRU.
Again. Which bugs and why haven't they been evaluated before posting?
> + * UPID and ui_recv will be referenced during context switch. Need to
> + * disable preemption while modifying the MSRs, UPID and ui_recv thread
> + * struct.
> + */
> + fpregs_lock();
And because you need to disable preemption you need to use
fpregs_lock(), right? That's not what fpregs_lock() is about.
> + /* Clear only the receiver specific state. Sender related state is not modified */
> + if (fpregs_state_valid(fpu, smp_processor_id())) {
> + /* Modify only the relevant bits of the MISC MSR */
> + rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_MISC, msr64);
> + msr64 &= ~GENMASK_ULL(39, 32);
This is exactly the crap which results from not defining stuff
properly. Random numbers in code which nobody can understand.
> + wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_MISC, msr64);
> + wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_PD, 0ULL);
> + wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_RR, 0ULL);
> + wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_STACKADJUST, 0ULL);
> + wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_HANDLER, 0ULL);
> + } else {
> + struct uintr_state *p;
> +
> + p = get_xsave_addr(&fpu->state.xsave, XFEATURE_UINTR);
> + if (p) {
> + p->handler = 0;
> + p->stack_adjust = 0;
> + p->upid_addr = 0;
> + p->uinv = 0;
> + p->uirr = 0;
> + }
So p == NULL is expected here?
> + }
> +
> + ui_recv = t->thread.ui_recv;
> + /*
> + * Suppress notifications so that no further interrupts are generated
> + * based on this UPID.
> + */
> + set_bit(UPID_SN, (unsigned long *)&ui_recv->upid_ctx->upid->nc.status);
> +
> + put_upid_ref(ui_recv->upid_ctx);
> + kfree(ui_recv);
> + t->thread.ui_recv = NULL;
Why has this put/kfree stuff to be in the fpregs locked section?
> + fpregs_unlock();
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int do_uintr_register_handler(u64 handler)
> +{
> + struct uintr_receiver *ui_recv;
> + struct uintr_upid *upid;
> + struct task_struct *t = current;
> + struct fpu *fpu = &t->thread.fpu;
> + u64 misc_msr;
> + int cpu;
> +
> + if (is_uintr_receiver(t))
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> + ui_recv = kzalloc(sizeof(*ui_recv), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!ui_recv)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + ui_recv->upid_ctx = alloc_upid();
> + if (!ui_recv->upid_ctx) {
> + kfree(ui_recv);
> + pr_debug("recv: alloc upid failed for task=%d\n", t->pid);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * TODO: Evaluate usage of fpregs_lock() and get_xsave_addr(). Bugs
> + * have been reported recently for PASID and WRPKRU.
Oh well.
> + * UPID and ui_recv will be referenced during context switch. Need to
> + * disable preemption while modifying the MSRs, UPID and ui_recv thread
> + * struct.
See above.
> + */
> + fpregs_lock();
> +
> + cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + upid = ui_recv->upid_ctx->upid;
> + upid->nc.nv = UINTR_NOTIFICATION_VECTOR;
> + upid->nc.ndst = cpu_to_ndst(cpu);
> +
> + t->thread.ui_recv = ui_recv;
> +
> + if (fpregs_state_valid(fpu, cpu)) {
> + wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_HANDLER, handler);
> + wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_PD, (u64)ui_recv->upid_ctx->upid);
> +
> + /* Set value as size of ABI redzone */
> + wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_STACKADJUST, 128);
> +
> + /* Modify only the relevant bits of the MISC MSR */
> + rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_MISC, misc_msr);
> + misc_msr |= (u64)UINTR_NOTIFICATION_VECTOR << 32;
> + wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_UINTR_MISC, misc_msr);
> + } else {
> + struct xregs_state *xsave;
> + struct uintr_state *p;
> +
> + xsave = &fpu->state.xsave;
> + xsave->header.xfeatures |= XFEATURE_MASK_UINTR;
> + p = get_xsave_addr(&fpu->state.xsave, XFEATURE_UINTR);
> + if (p) {
> + p->handler = handler;
> + p->upid_addr = (u64)ui_recv->upid_ctx->upid;
> + p->stack_adjust = 128;
> + p->uinv = UINTR_NOTIFICATION_VECTOR;
> + }
Again. How is p supposed to be NULL and if so, why is this silently
treating this as success?
> + }
> +
> + fpregs_unlock();
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-23 23:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-13 20:01 [RFC PATCH 00/13] x86 User Interrupts support Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 01/13] x86/uintr/man-page: Include man pages draft for reference Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 02/13] Documentation/x86: Add documentation for User Interrupts Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 03/13] x86/cpu: Enumerate User Interrupts support Sohil Mehta
2021-09-23 22:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-24 19:59 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-27 20:42 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 04/13] x86/fpu/xstate: Enumerate User Interrupts supervisor state Sohil Mehta
2021-09-23 22:34 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-27 22:25 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 05/13] x86/irq: Reserve a user IPI notification vector Sohil Mehta
2021-09-23 23:07 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-25 13:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-26 12:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-27 19:07 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-28 8:11 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-27 19:26 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 06/13] x86/uintr: Introduce uintr receiver syscalls Sohil Mehta
2021-09-23 12:26 ` Greg KH
2021-09-24 0:05 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-27 23:20 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-28 4:39 ` Greg KH
2021-09-28 16:47 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-23 23:52 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2021-09-27 23:57 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 07/13] x86/process/64: Add uintr task context switch support Sohil Mehta
2021-09-24 0:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-28 0:30 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 08/13] x86/process/64: Clean up uintr task fork and exit paths Sohil Mehta
2021-09-24 1:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-28 1:23 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 09/13] x86/uintr: Introduce vector registration and uintr_fd syscall Sohil Mehta
2021-09-24 10:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-28 20:40 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 10/13] x86/uintr: Introduce user IPI sender syscalls Sohil Mehta
2021-09-23 12:28 ` Greg KH
2021-09-28 18:01 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-29 7:04 ` Greg KH
2021-09-29 14:27 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-24 10:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 11/13] x86/uintr: Introduce uintr_wait() syscall Sohil Mehta
2021-09-24 11:04 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-25 12:08 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-28 23:13 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-28 23:08 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-26 14:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-29 1:09 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-29 3:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-09-29 4:56 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-30 18:08 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-09-30 19:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-30 22:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-10-01 0:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-10-01 4:41 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-10-01 9:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-10-01 15:13 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-10-01 18:04 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-10-01 21:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-10-01 23:00 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-10-01 23:04 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 12/13] x86/uintr: Wire up the user interrupt syscalls Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:01 ` [RFC PATCH 13/13] selftests/x86: Add basic tests for User IPI Sohil Mehta
2021-09-13 20:27 ` [RFC PATCH 00/13] x86 User Interrupts support Dave Hansen
2021-09-14 19:03 ` Mehta, Sohil
2021-09-23 12:19 ` Greg KH
2021-09-23 14:09 ` Greg KH
2021-09-23 14:46 ` Dave Hansen
2021-09-23 15:07 ` Greg KH
2021-09-23 23:24 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-23 23:09 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-24 0:17 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-23 14:39 ` Jens Axboe
2021-09-29 4:31 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-09-30 16:30 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-09-30 17:24 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-09-30 17:26 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-10-01 16:35 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-01 16:41 ` Richard Henderson
2021-09-30 16:26 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-10-01 0:40 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-10-01 8:19 ` Pavel Machek
2021-11-18 22:19 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-11-16 3:49 ` Prakash Sangappa
2021-11-18 21:44 ` Sohil Mehta
2021-12-22 16:17 ` Chrisma Pakha
2022-01-07 2:08 ` Sohil Mehta
2022-01-17 1:14 ` Chrisma Pakha
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=87czoyg88k.ffs@tglx \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=christian@brauner.io \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=gayatri.kammela@intel.com \
--cc=guang.zeng@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ramesh.thomas@intel.com \
--cc=randy.e.witt@intel.com \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=sohil.mehta@intel.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).