From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Haibo Xu <Haibo.Xu@arm.com>, Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/6] arm64: kvm: Introduce MTE VM feature
Date: Fri, 7 May 2021 19:25:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210507182538.GF26528@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <329286e8-a8f3-ea1a-1802-58813255a4a5@arm.com>
On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 05:15:25PM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> On 04/05/2021 18:40, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 05:06:41PM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> > > On 28/04/2021 18:07, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > While the set_pte_at() race on the page flags is somewhat clearer, we
> > > > may still have a race here with the VMM's set_pte_at() if the page is
> > > > mapped as tagged. KVM has its own mmu_lock but it wouldn't be held when
> > > > handling the VMM page tables (well, not always, see below).
> > > >
> > > > gfn_to_pfn_prot() ends up calling get_user_pages*(). At least the slow
> > > > path (hva_to_pfn_slow()) ends up with FOLL_TOUCH in gup and the VMM pte
> > > > would be set, tags cleared (if PROT_MTE) before the stage 2 pte. I'm not
> > > > sure whether get_user_page_fast_only() does the same.
> > > >
> > > > The race with an mprotect(PROT_MTE) in the VMM is fine I think as the
> > > > KVM mmu notifier is invoked before set_pte_at() and racing with another
> > > > user_mem_abort() is serialised by the KVM mmu_lock. The subsequent
> > > > set_pte_at() would see the PG_mte_tagged set either by the current CPU
> > > > or by the one it was racing with.
> > >
> > > Given the changes to set_pte_at() which means that tags are restored from
> > > swap even if !PROT_MTE, the only race I can see remaining is the creation of
> > > new PROT_MTE mappings. As you mention an attempt to change mappings in the
> > > VMM memory space should involve a mmu notifier call which I think serialises
> > > this. So the remaining issue is doing this in a separate address space.
> > >
> > > So I guess the potential problem is:
> > >
> > > * allocate memory MAP_SHARED but !PROT_MTE
> > > * fork()
> > > * VM causes a fault in parent address space
> > > * child does a mprotect(PROT_MTE)
> > >
> > > With the last two potentially racing. Sadly I can't see a good way of
> > > handling that.
> >
> > Ah, the mmap lock doesn't help as they are different processes
> > (mprotect() acquires it as a writer).
> >
> > I wonder whether this is racy even in the absence of KVM. If both parent
> > and child do an mprotect(PROT_MTE), one of them may be reading stale
> > tags for a brief period.
> >
> > Maybe we should revisit whether shared MTE pages are of any use, though
> > it's an ABI change (not bad if no-one is relying on this). However...
>
> Shared MTE pages are certainly hard to use correctly (e.g. see the
> discussions with the VMM accessing guest memory). But I guess that boat has
> sailed.
Digging out some old emails (two years ago), the Chrome people may have
found a use for MTE in shared mappings (with memfd_create), though not
sure they took advantage of this yet.
> > Thinking about this, we have a similar problem with the PG_dcache_clean
> > and two processes doing mprotect(PROT_EXEC). One of them could see the
> > flag set and skip the I-cache maintenance while the other executes
> > stale instructions. change_pte_range() could acquire the page lock if
> > the page is VM_SHARED (my preferred core mm fix). It doesn't immediately
> > solve the MTE/KVM case but we could at least take the page lock via
> > user_mem_abort().
>
> For PG_dcache_clean AFAICS the solution is actually simple: split the test
> and set parts. i.e..:
>
> if (!test_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags)) {
> sync_icache_aliases(page_address(page), page_size(page));
> set_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags);
> }
>
> There isn't a problem with repeating the sync_icache_aliases() call in the
> case of a race. Or am I missing something?
No, the fix is simple as you said.
> > Or maybe we just document this behaviour as racy both for PROT_EXEC and
> > PROT_MTE mappings and be done with this. The minor issue with PROT_MTE
> > is the potential leaking of tags (it's harder to leak information
> > through the I-cache).
>
> This is the real issue I see - the race in PROT_MTE case is either a data
> leak (syncing after setting the bit) or data loss (syncing before setting
> the bit).
For a moment I thought an mmap(PROT_MTE, MAP_SHARED) on memfd/tmpfs file
may lead to the same situation but the mmap() itself won't directly
cause allocating the page. The subsequent fault via filemap_map_pages()
seems to take the page lock.
> But without serialising through a spinlock (in mte_sync_tags()) I haven't
> been able to come up with any way of closing the race. But with the change
> to set_pte_at() to call mte_sync_tags() even if the PTE isn't PROT_MTE that
> is likely to seriously hurt performance.
Yeah. We could add another page flag as a lock though I think it should
be the core code that prevents the race.
If we are to do it in the arch code, maybe easier with a custom
ptep_modify_prot_start/end() where we check if it's VM_SHARED and
VM_MTE, take a (big) lock.
In the core code, something like below (well, a partial hack, not tested
and it doesn't handle huge pages but just to give an idea):
diff --git a/mm/mprotect.c b/mm/mprotect.c
index 94188df1ee55..6ba96ff141a6 100644
--- a/mm/mprotect.c
+++ b/mm/mprotect.c
@@ -76,14 +76,13 @@ static unsigned long change_pte_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
if (pte_present(oldpte)) {
pte_t ptent;
bool preserve_write = prot_numa && pte_write(oldpte);
+ struct page *page = NULL;
/*
* Avoid trapping faults against the zero or KSM
* pages. See similar comment in change_huge_pmd.
*/
if (prot_numa) {
- struct page *page;
-
/* Avoid TLB flush if possible */
if (pte_protnone(oldpte))
continue;
@@ -114,6 +113,10 @@ static unsigned long change_pte_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
}
oldpte = ptep_modify_prot_start(vma, addr, pte);
+ if (vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED) {
+ page = vm_normal_page(vma, addr, oldpte);
+ lock_page(page);
+ }
ptent = pte_modify(oldpte, newprot);
if (preserve_write)
ptent = pte_mk_savedwrite(ptent);
@@ -138,6 +141,8 @@ static unsigned long change_pte_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
ptent = pte_mkwrite(ptent);
}
ptep_modify_prot_commit(vma, addr, pte, oldpte, ptent);
+ if (page)
+ unlock_page(page);
pages++;
} else if (is_swap_pte(oldpte)) {
swp_entry_t entry = pte_to_swp_entry(oldpte);
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-07 18:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-16 15:43 [PATCH v11 0/6] MTE support for KVM guest Steven Price
2021-04-16 15:43 ` [PATCH v11 1/6] arm64: mte: Sync tags for pages where PTE is untagged Steven Price
2021-04-27 17:43 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-04-29 16:06 ` Steven Price
2021-05-04 15:29 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-04-16 15:43 ` [PATCH v11 2/6] arm64: kvm: Introduce MTE VM feature Steven Price
2021-04-28 17:07 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-04-29 16:06 ` Steven Price
2021-05-04 17:40 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-06 16:15 ` Steven Price
2021-05-07 18:25 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2021-05-10 18:35 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-12 15:46 ` Steven Price
2021-05-12 17:45 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-13 10:57 ` Steven Price
2021-05-13 15:08 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-13 15:21 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-04-16 15:43 ` [PATCH v11 3/6] arm64: kvm: Save/restore MTE registers Steven Price
2021-04-16 15:43 ` [PATCH v11 4/6] arm64: kvm: Expose KVM_ARM_CAP_MTE Steven Price
2021-04-16 15:43 ` [PATCH v11 5/6] KVM: arm64: ioctl to fetch/store tags in a guest Steven Price
2021-04-27 17:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-04-29 16:06 ` Steven Price
2021-05-04 17:44 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-07 9:44 ` Steven Price
2021-05-07 9:59 ` David Laight
2021-04-16 15:43 ` [PATCH v11 6/6] KVM: arm64: Document MTE capability and ioctl Steven Price
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=20210507182538.GF26528@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=Haibo.Xu@arm.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@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).