From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Xiyu Yang <xiyuyang19@fudan.edu.cn>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
yuanxzhang@fudan.edu.cn, Xin Tan <tanxin.ctf@gmail.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
keescook@chromium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/rmap: Convert from atomic_t to refcount_t on anon_vma->refcount
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 08:43:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YR9PHD+pWTelGKVd@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wh_vEzmYnMufOa=03WAU=DRM5+n6uZy=dVtJERFJm3Q-Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 12:09:37PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 8:21 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > If we can skip the OF... we can do something like this:
>
> Honestly, I think a lot of the refcount code is questionable. It was
> absolutely written with no care for performance AT ALL.
That's a bit unfair I feel. Will's last rewrite of the stuff was
specifically to address performance issues.
> I'm not sure it helps to then add arch-specific code for it without
> thinking it through a _lot_ first.
>
> It might be better to just have a "atomic_t with overflow handling" in
> general, exactly because the refcount_t was designed and written
> without any regard for code that cares about performance.
The primary concern was to use a single unconditional atomic op where
possible (mostly fetch_add), as the atomic op dominates whatever else it
does. The rest is just because C absolutely sucks at conditions.
Doing atomic_t with overflow handling would require doing the whole
thing in arch asm.
> > static inline bool refcount_dec_and_test(refcount_t *r)
> > {
> > asm_volatile_goto (LOCK_PREFIX "decl %[var]\n\t"
> > "jz %l[cc_zero]\n\t"
> > "jns 1f\n\t"
>
> I think you can use "jl" for the bad case.
Duh yes. I clearly didn't have my head on straight.
> I think it's better to handle that case out-of-line than play games
> with UD, though - this is going to be the rare case, the likelihood
> that we get the fixup wrong is just too big. Once it's out-of-line
> it's not as critical any more, even if it does add to the size of the
> code.
Fine with me; although the immediate complaint from Andrew was about
size, hence my UD1 hackery.
> So if we do this, I think it should be something like
>
> static inline __must_check bool refcount_dec_and_test(refcount_t *r)
> {
> asm_volatile_goto (LOCK_PREFIX "decl %[var]\n\t"
> "jz %l[cc_zero]\n\t"
> "jl %l[cc_error]"
> : : [var] "m" (r->refs.counter)
> : "memory" : cc_zero, cc_error);
>
> return false;
>
> cc_zero:
> return true;
> cc_error:
> refcount_warn_saturate(r, REFCOUNT_SUB_UAF);
> return false;
> }
>
> and we can discuss whether we could improve on the
> refcount_warn_saturate() separately.
I can do the refcount_warn_saturate() change separately.
Let me go check how small I can get it...
> But see above: maybe just make this a separate "careful atomic_t",
> with the option to panic-on-overflow. So then we could get rid of
> refcount_warn_saturate() enmtirely above, and instead just have a
> (compile-time option) BUG() case, with the non-careful version just
> being our existing atomic_dec_and_test.
We used to have that option; the argument was made that everybody cares
about security and as long as this doesn't show up on benchmarks we
good.
Also, I don't think most people want the overflow to go BUG, WARN is
mostly the right thing and only the super paranoid use panic-on-warn or
something.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-20 6:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-19 3:23 [PATCH] mm/rmap: Convert from atomic_t to refcount_t on anon_vma->refcount Xiyu Yang
2021-07-20 23:01 ` Andrew Morton
2021-08-19 13:21 ` Will Deacon
2021-08-19 14:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-08-19 15:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-08-19 19:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-08-20 6:43 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-08-20 7:33 ` Kees Cook
2021-08-20 8:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-08-20 8:24 ` Will Deacon
2021-08-20 9:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-08-20 17:26 ` Kees Cook
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=YR9PHD+pWTelGKVd@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
--cc=tanxin.ctf@gmail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=xiyuyang19@fudan.edu.cn \
--cc=yuanxzhang@fudan.edu.cn \
/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).