linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: kstewart@linuxfoundation.org, gustavo@embeddedor.com,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jing Xiangfeng <jingxiangfeng@huawei.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com,
	bhelgaas@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: fix page faults in do_alignment
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 23:29:06 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190830222906.GH13294@shell.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y2zav01z.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 04:02:48PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 02:45:36PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 09:31:17PM +0800, Jing Xiangfeng wrote:
> >> >> The function do_alignment can handle misaligned address for user and
> >> >> kernel space. If it is a userspace access, do_alignment may fail on
> >> >> a low-memory situation, because page faults are disabled in
> >> >> probe_kernel_address.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Fix this by using __copy_from_user stead of probe_kernel_address.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Fixes: b255188 ("ARM: fix scheduling while atomic warning in alignment handling code")
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jing Xiangfeng <jingxiangfeng@huawei.com>
> >> >
> >> > NAK.
> >> >
> >> > The "scheduling while atomic warning in alignment handling code" is
> >> > caused by fixing up the page fault while trying to handle the
> >> > mis-alignment fault generated from an instruction in atomic context.
> >> >
> >> > Your patch re-introduces that bug.
> >> 
> >> And the patch that fixed scheduling while atomic apparently introduced a
> >> regression.  Admittedly a regression that took 6 years to track down but
> >> still.
> >
> > Right, and given the number of years, we are trading one regression for
> > a different regression.  If we revert to the original code where we
> > fix up, we will end up with people complaining about a "new" regression
> > caused by reverting the previous fix.  Follow this policy and we just
> > end up constantly reverting the previous revert.
> >
> > The window is very small - the page in question will have had to have
> > instructions read from it immediately prior to the handler being entered,
> > and would have had to be made "old" before subsequently being unmapped.
> 
> > Rather than excessively complicating the code and making it even more
> > inefficient (as in your patch), we could instead retry executing the
> > instruction when we discover that the page is unavailable, which should
> > cause the page to be paged back in.
> 
> My patch does not introduce any inefficiencies.  It onlys moves the
> check for user_mode up a bit.  My patch did duplicate the code.
> 
> > If the page really is unavailable, the prefetch abort should cause a
> > SEGV to be raised, otherwise the re-execution should replace the page.
> >
> > The danger to that approach is we page it back in, and it gets paged
> > back out before we're able to read the instruction indefinitely.
> 
> I would think either a little code duplication or a function that looks
> at user_mode(regs) and picks the appropriate kind of copy to do would be
> the best way to go.  Because what needs to happen in the two cases for
> reading the instruction are almost completely different.

That is what I mean.  I'd prefer to avoid that with the large chunk of
code.  How about instead adding a local replacement for
probe_kernel_address() that just sorts out the reading, rather than
duplicating all the code to deal with thumb fixup. 

> > However, as it's impossible for me to contact the submitter, anything
> > I do will be poking about in the dark and without any way to validate
> > that it does fix the problem, so I think apart from reviewing of any
> > patches, there's not much I can do.
> 
> I didn't realize your emails to him were bouncing.  That is odd.  Mine
> don't appear to be.

Hmm, so the fact I posted publically in reply to my reply with the MTA
bounce message didn't give you a clue?

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-30 22:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-30 13:31 [PATCH] arm: fix page faults in do_alignment Jing Xiangfeng
2019-08-30 13:35 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-08-30 13:48   ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-08-30 19:45   ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-08-30 20:30     ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-08-30 21:02       ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-08-30 22:29         ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin [this message]
2019-09-02 17:36           ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-09-04  2:17             ` Jing Xiangfeng
2019-09-06 15:17             ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-09-15 18:34               ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-09-16 14:31                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-08-31  1:49   ` Jing Xiangfeng
2019-08-31  7:55     ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2019-08-31  9:16       ` Jing Xiangfeng

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=20190830222906.GH13294@shell.armlinux.org.uk \
    --to=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=gustavo@embeddedor.com \
    --cc=jingxiangfeng@huawei.com \
    --cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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).