linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 11/12] x86/mm/tlb: Use async and inline messages for flushing
Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 20:42:43 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <F2F9A98B-2496-41D3-80ED-748078D21943@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrVf9dh4GxEXsHbP65x6YuzOBf+7HWqOgBBjUma+7nB6Nw@mail.gmail.com>

> On May 31, 2019, at 1:37 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 1:13 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> wrote:
>> On 5/31/19 12:31 PM, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>>> On May 31, 2019, at 11:44 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On May 31, 2019, at 3:57 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:36:44PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>>>>> When we flush userspace mappings, we can defer the TLB flushes, as long
>>>>>> the following conditions are met:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1. No tables are freed, since otherwise speculative page walks might
>>>>>> cause machine-checks.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2. No one would access userspace before flush takes place. Specifically,
>>>>>> NMI handlers and kprobes would avoid accessing userspace.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Use the new SMP support to execute remote function calls with inlined
>>>>>> data for the matter. The function remote TLB flushing function would be
>>>>>> executed asynchronously and the local CPU would continue execution as
>>>>>> soon as the IPI was delivered, before the function was actually
>>>>>> executed. Since tlb_flush_info is copied, there is no risk it would
>>>>>> change before the TLB flush is actually executed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Change nmi_uaccess_okay() to check whether a remote TLB flush is
>>>>>> currently in progress on this CPU by checking whether the asynchronously
>>>>>> called function is the remote TLB flushing function. The current
>>>>>> implementation disallows access in such cases, but it is also possible
>>>>>> to flush the entire TLB in such case and allow access.
>>>>> 
>>>>> ARGGH, brain hurt. I'm not sure I fully understand this one. How is it
>>>>> different from today, where the NMI can hit in the middle of the TLB
>>>>> invalidation?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Also; since we're not waiting on the IPI, what prevents us from freeing
>>>>> the user pages before the remote CPU is 'done' with them? Currently the
>>>>> synchronous IPI is like a sync point where we *know* the remote CPU is
>>>>> completely done accessing the page.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Where getting an IPI stops speculation, speculation again restarts
>>>>> inside the interrupt handler, and until we've passed the INVLPG/MOV CR3,
>>>>> speculation can happen on that TLB entry, even though we've already
>>>>> freed and re-used the user-page.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Also, what happens if the TLB invalidation IPI is stuck behind another
>>>>> smp_function_call IPI that is doing user-access?
>>>>> 
>>>>> As said,.. brain hurts.
>>>> 
>>>> Speculation aside, any code doing dirty tracking needs the flush to happen
>>>> for real before it reads the dirty bit.
>>>> 
>>>> How does this patch guarantee that the flush is really done before someone
>>>> depends on it?
>>> 
>>> I was always under the impression that the dirty-bit is pass-through - the
>>> A/D-assist walks the tables and sets the dirty bit upon access. Otherwise,
>>> what happens when you invalidate the PTE, and have already marked the PTE as
>>> non-present? Would the CPU set the dirty-bit at this point?
>> 
>> Modulo bugs^Werrata...  No.  What actually happens is that a
>> try-to-set-dirty-bit page table walk acts just like a TLB miss.  The old
>> contents of the TLB are discarded and only the in-memory contents matter
>> for forward progress.  If Present=0 when the PTE is reached, you'll get
>> a normal Present=0 page fault.
> 
> Wait, does that mean that you can do a lock cmpxchg or similar to
> clear the dirty and writable bits together and, if the dirty bit was
> clear, skip the TLB flush?  If so, nifty!  Modulo errata, of course.
> And I seem to remember some exceptions relating to CET shadow stack
> involving the dirty bit being set on not-present pages.

I did something similar with the access-bit in the past.

Anyhow, I have a bug here - the code does not wait for the indication that
the IPI was received. I need to rerun performance measurements again once I
fix it.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-31 20:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-31  6:36 [RFC PATCH v2 00/12] x86: Flush remote TLBs concurrently and async Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/12] smp: Remove smp_call_function() and on_each_cpu() return values Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/12] smp: Run functions concurrently in smp_call_function_many() Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/12] x86/mm/tlb: Refactor common code into flush_tlb_on_cpus() Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/12] x86/mm/tlb: Flush remote and local TLBs concurrently Nadav Amit
2019-05-31 11:48   ` Juergen Gross
2019-05-31 19:44     ` Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/12] x86/mm/tlb: Optimize local TLB flushes Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/12] KVM: x86: Provide paravirtualized flush_tlb_multi() Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/12] smp: Do not mark call_function_data as shared Nadav Amit
2019-05-31 10:17   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-31 17:50     ` Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/12] x86/tlb: Privatize cpu_tlbstate Nadav Amit
2019-05-31 18:48   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-31 19:42     ` Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/12] x86/apic: Use non-atomic operations when possible Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/12] smp: Enable data inlining for inter-processor function call Nadav Amit
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 11/12] x86/mm/tlb: Use async and inline messages for flushing Nadav Amit
2019-05-31 10:57   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-31 18:29     ` Nadav Amit
2019-05-31 19:20       ` Jann Horn
2019-05-31 20:04         ` Nadav Amit
2019-05-31 20:37           ` Jann Horn
2019-05-31 18:44     ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-31 19:31       ` Nadav Amit
2019-05-31 20:13         ` Dave Hansen
2019-05-31 20:37           ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-31 20:42             ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2019-05-31 21:06             ` Dave Hansen
2019-05-31 21:14   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-31 21:33     ` Nadav Amit
2019-05-31 21:47       ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-31 22:07         ` Nadav Amit
2019-06-07  5:28           ` Nadav Amit
2019-06-07 16:42             ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-31  6:36 ` [RFC PATCH v2 12/12] x86/mm/tlb: Reverting the removal of flush_tlb_info from stack Nadav Amit

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=F2F9A98B-2496-41D3-80ED-748078D21943@vmware.com \
    --to=namit@vmware.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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).