All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	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 v12 3/8] arm64: mte: Sync tags for pages where PTE is untagged
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 10:32:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f3a3f560-4d2b-9cd3-bbf4-ea8135ab4d17@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y2cdtk09.wl-maz@kernel.org>

On 17/05/2021 17:14, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2021 13:32:34 +0100,
> Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> A KVM guest could store tags in a page even if the VMM hasn't mapped
>> the page with PROT_MTE. So when restoring pages from swap we will
>> need to check to see if there are any saved tags even if !pte_tagged().
>>
>> However don't check pages for which pte_access_permitted() returns false
>> as these will not have been swapped out.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h |  9 +++++++--
>>  arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c          | 16 ++++++++++++++--
>>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> index 0b10204e72fc..275178a810c1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> @@ -314,8 +314,13 @@ static inline void set_pte_at(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>>  	if (pte_present(pte) && pte_user_exec(pte) && !pte_special(pte))
>>  		__sync_icache_dcache(pte);
>>  
>> -	if (system_supports_mte() &&
>> -	    pte_present(pte) && pte_tagged(pte) && !pte_special(pte))
>> +	/*
>> +	 * If the PTE would provide user space access to the tags associated
>> +	 * with it then ensure that the MTE tags are synchronised.  Exec-only
>> +	 * mappings don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check tags).
> 
> I'm not sure I understand this comment. Of course, execution doesn't
> match tags. But the memory could still have tags associated with
> it. Does this mean such a page would lose its tags is swapped out?

Hmm, I probably should have reread that - the context of the comment is
lost.

I added the comment when changing to pte_access_permitted(), and the
comment on pte_access_permitted() explains a potential gotcha:

 * p??_access_permitted() is true for valid user mappings (PTE_USER
 * bit set, subject to the write permission check). For execute-only
 * mappings, like PROT_EXEC with EPAN (both PTE_USER and PTE_UXN bits
 * not set) must return false. PROT_NONE mappings do not have the
 * PTE_VALID bit set.

So execute-only mappings return false even though that is effectively a
type of user access. However, because MTE checks are not performed by
the PE for instruction fetches this doesn't matter. I'll update the
comment, how about:

/*
 * If the PTE would provide user space access to the tags associated
 * with it then ensure that the MTE tags are synchronised.  Although
 * pte_access_permitted() returns false for exec only mappings, they
 * don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check tags).
 */

Thanks,

Steve

> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.
> 
>> +	 */
>> +	if (system_supports_mte() && pte_present(pte) &&
>> +	    pte_access_permitted(pte, false) && !pte_special(pte))
>>  		mte_sync_tags(ptep, pte);
>>  
>>  	__check_racy_pte_update(mm, ptep, pte);
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> index c88e778c2fa9..a604818c52c1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> @@ -33,11 +33,15 @@ DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(mte_async_mode);
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mte_async_mode);
>>  #endif
>>  
>> -static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap)
>> +static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap,
>> +			       bool pte_is_tagged)
>>  {
>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>  	pte_t old_pte = READ_ONCE(*ptep);
>>  
>> +	if (!is_swap_pte(old_pte) && !pte_is_tagged)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>  	spin_lock_irqsave(&tag_sync_lock, flags);
>>  
>>  	/* Recheck with the lock held */
>> @@ -53,6 +57,9 @@ static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap)
>>  		}
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	if (!pte_is_tagged)
>> +		goto out;
>> +
>>  	page_kasan_tag_reset(page);
>>  	/*
>>  	 * We need smp_wmb() in between setting the flags and clearing the
>> @@ -76,10 +83,15 @@ void mte_sync_tags(pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
>>  	bool check_swap = nr_pages == 1;
>>  	bool pte_is_tagged = pte_tagged(pte);
>>  
>> +	/* Early out if there's nothing to do */
>> +	if (!check_swap && !pte_is_tagged)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>  	/* if PG_mte_tagged is set, tags have already been initialised */
>>  	for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++, page++) {
>>  		if (!test_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags))
>> -			mte_sync_page_tags(page, ptep, check_swap);
>> +			mte_sync_page_tags(page, ptep, check_swap,
>> +					   pte_is_tagged);
>>  	}
>>  }
>>  
>> -- 
>> 2.20.1
>>
>>
> 


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>, Haibo Xu <Haibo.Xu@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
	Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 3/8] arm64: mte: Sync tags for pages where PTE is untagged
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 10:32:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f3a3f560-4d2b-9cd3-bbf4-ea8135ab4d17@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y2cdtk09.wl-maz@kernel.org>

On 17/05/2021 17:14, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2021 13:32:34 +0100,
> Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> A KVM guest could store tags in a page even if the VMM hasn't mapped
>> the page with PROT_MTE. So when restoring pages from swap we will
>> need to check to see if there are any saved tags even if !pte_tagged().
>>
>> However don't check pages for which pte_access_permitted() returns false
>> as these will not have been swapped out.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h |  9 +++++++--
>>  arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c          | 16 ++++++++++++++--
>>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> index 0b10204e72fc..275178a810c1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> @@ -314,8 +314,13 @@ static inline void set_pte_at(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>>  	if (pte_present(pte) && pte_user_exec(pte) && !pte_special(pte))
>>  		__sync_icache_dcache(pte);
>>  
>> -	if (system_supports_mte() &&
>> -	    pte_present(pte) && pte_tagged(pte) && !pte_special(pte))
>> +	/*
>> +	 * If the PTE would provide user space access to the tags associated
>> +	 * with it then ensure that the MTE tags are synchronised.  Exec-only
>> +	 * mappings don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check tags).
> 
> I'm not sure I understand this comment. Of course, execution doesn't
> match tags. But the memory could still have tags associated with
> it. Does this mean such a page would lose its tags is swapped out?

Hmm, I probably should have reread that - the context of the comment is
lost.

I added the comment when changing to pte_access_permitted(), and the
comment on pte_access_permitted() explains a potential gotcha:

 * p??_access_permitted() is true for valid user mappings (PTE_USER
 * bit set, subject to the write permission check). For execute-only
 * mappings, like PROT_EXEC with EPAN (both PTE_USER and PTE_UXN bits
 * not set) must return false. PROT_NONE mappings do not have the
 * PTE_VALID bit set.

So execute-only mappings return false even though that is effectively a
type of user access. However, because MTE checks are not performed by
the PE for instruction fetches this doesn't matter. I'll update the
comment, how about:

/*
 * If the PTE would provide user space access to the tags associated
 * with it then ensure that the MTE tags are synchronised.  Although
 * pte_access_permitted() returns false for exec only mappings, they
 * don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check tags).
 */

Thanks,

Steve

> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.
> 
>> +	 */
>> +	if (system_supports_mte() && pte_present(pte) &&
>> +	    pte_access_permitted(pte, false) && !pte_special(pte))
>>  		mte_sync_tags(ptep, pte);
>>  
>>  	__check_racy_pte_update(mm, ptep, pte);
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> index c88e778c2fa9..a604818c52c1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> @@ -33,11 +33,15 @@ DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(mte_async_mode);
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mte_async_mode);
>>  #endif
>>  
>> -static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap)
>> +static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap,
>> +			       bool pte_is_tagged)
>>  {
>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>  	pte_t old_pte = READ_ONCE(*ptep);
>>  
>> +	if (!is_swap_pte(old_pte) && !pte_is_tagged)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>  	spin_lock_irqsave(&tag_sync_lock, flags);
>>  
>>  	/* Recheck with the lock held */
>> @@ -53,6 +57,9 @@ static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap)
>>  		}
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	if (!pte_is_tagged)
>> +		goto out;
>> +
>>  	page_kasan_tag_reset(page);
>>  	/*
>>  	 * We need smp_wmb() in between setting the flags and clearing the
>> @@ -76,10 +83,15 @@ void mte_sync_tags(pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
>>  	bool check_swap = nr_pages == 1;
>>  	bool pte_is_tagged = pte_tagged(pte);
>>  
>> +	/* Early out if there's nothing to do */
>> +	if (!check_swap && !pte_is_tagged)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>  	/* if PG_mte_tagged is set, tags have already been initialised */
>>  	for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++, page++) {
>>  		if (!test_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags))
>> -			mte_sync_page_tags(page, ptep, check_swap);
>> +			mte_sync_page_tags(page, ptep, check_swap,
>> +					   pte_is_tagged);
>>  	}
>>  }
>>  
>> -- 
>> 2.20.1
>>
>>
> 



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
	Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 3/8] arm64: mte: Sync tags for pages where PTE is untagged
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 10:32:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f3a3f560-4d2b-9cd3-bbf4-ea8135ab4d17@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y2cdtk09.wl-maz@kernel.org>

On 17/05/2021 17:14, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2021 13:32:34 +0100,
> Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> A KVM guest could store tags in a page even if the VMM hasn't mapped
>> the page with PROT_MTE. So when restoring pages from swap we will
>> need to check to see if there are any saved tags even if !pte_tagged().
>>
>> However don't check pages for which pte_access_permitted() returns false
>> as these will not have been swapped out.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h |  9 +++++++--
>>  arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c          | 16 ++++++++++++++--
>>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> index 0b10204e72fc..275178a810c1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> @@ -314,8 +314,13 @@ static inline void set_pte_at(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>>  	if (pte_present(pte) && pte_user_exec(pte) && !pte_special(pte))
>>  		__sync_icache_dcache(pte);
>>  
>> -	if (system_supports_mte() &&
>> -	    pte_present(pte) && pte_tagged(pte) && !pte_special(pte))
>> +	/*
>> +	 * If the PTE would provide user space access to the tags associated
>> +	 * with it then ensure that the MTE tags are synchronised.  Exec-only
>> +	 * mappings don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check tags).
> 
> I'm not sure I understand this comment. Of course, execution doesn't
> match tags. But the memory could still have tags associated with
> it. Does this mean such a page would lose its tags is swapped out?

Hmm, I probably should have reread that - the context of the comment is
lost.

I added the comment when changing to pte_access_permitted(), and the
comment on pte_access_permitted() explains a potential gotcha:

 * p??_access_permitted() is true for valid user mappings (PTE_USER
 * bit set, subject to the write permission check). For execute-only
 * mappings, like PROT_EXEC with EPAN (both PTE_USER and PTE_UXN bits
 * not set) must return false. PROT_NONE mappings do not have the
 * PTE_VALID bit set.

So execute-only mappings return false even though that is effectively a
type of user access. However, because MTE checks are not performed by
the PE for instruction fetches this doesn't matter. I'll update the
comment, how about:

/*
 * If the PTE would provide user space access to the tags associated
 * with it then ensure that the MTE tags are synchronised.  Although
 * pte_access_permitted() returns false for exec only mappings, they
 * don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check tags).
 */

Thanks,

Steve

> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.
> 
>> +	 */
>> +	if (system_supports_mte() && pte_present(pte) &&
>> +	    pte_access_permitted(pte, false) && !pte_special(pte))
>>  		mte_sync_tags(ptep, pte);
>>  
>>  	__check_racy_pte_update(mm, ptep, pte);
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> index c88e778c2fa9..a604818c52c1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> @@ -33,11 +33,15 @@ DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(mte_async_mode);
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mte_async_mode);
>>  #endif
>>  
>> -static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap)
>> +static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap,
>> +			       bool pte_is_tagged)
>>  {
>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>  	pte_t old_pte = READ_ONCE(*ptep);
>>  
>> +	if (!is_swap_pte(old_pte) && !pte_is_tagged)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>  	spin_lock_irqsave(&tag_sync_lock, flags);
>>  
>>  	/* Recheck with the lock held */
>> @@ -53,6 +57,9 @@ static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap)
>>  		}
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	if (!pte_is_tagged)
>> +		goto out;
>> +
>>  	page_kasan_tag_reset(page);
>>  	/*
>>  	 * We need smp_wmb() in between setting the flags and clearing the
>> @@ -76,10 +83,15 @@ void mte_sync_tags(pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
>>  	bool check_swap = nr_pages == 1;
>>  	bool pte_is_tagged = pte_tagged(pte);
>>  
>> +	/* Early out if there's nothing to do */
>> +	if (!check_swap && !pte_is_tagged)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>  	/* if PG_mte_tagged is set, tags have already been initialised */
>>  	for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++, page++) {
>>  		if (!test_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags))
>> -			mte_sync_page_tags(page, ptep, check_swap);
>> +			mte_sync_page_tags(page, ptep, check_swap,
>> +					   pte_is_tagged);
>>  	}
>>  }
>>  
>> -- 
>> 2.20.1
>>
>>
> 

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	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 v12 3/8] arm64: mte: Sync tags for pages where PTE is untagged
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 10:32:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f3a3f560-4d2b-9cd3-bbf4-ea8135ab4d17@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y2cdtk09.wl-maz@kernel.org>

On 17/05/2021 17:14, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2021 13:32:34 +0100,
> Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> A KVM guest could store tags in a page even if the VMM hasn't mapped
>> the page with PROT_MTE. So when restoring pages from swap we will
>> need to check to see if there are any saved tags even if !pte_tagged().
>>
>> However don't check pages for which pte_access_permitted() returns false
>> as these will not have been swapped out.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h |  9 +++++++--
>>  arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c          | 16 ++++++++++++++--
>>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> index 0b10204e72fc..275178a810c1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> @@ -314,8 +314,13 @@ static inline void set_pte_at(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>>  	if (pte_present(pte) && pte_user_exec(pte) && !pte_special(pte))
>>  		__sync_icache_dcache(pte);
>>  
>> -	if (system_supports_mte() &&
>> -	    pte_present(pte) && pte_tagged(pte) && !pte_special(pte))
>> +	/*
>> +	 * If the PTE would provide user space access to the tags associated
>> +	 * with it then ensure that the MTE tags are synchronised.  Exec-only
>> +	 * mappings don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check tags).
> 
> I'm not sure I understand this comment. Of course, execution doesn't
> match tags. But the memory could still have tags associated with
> it. Does this mean such a page would lose its tags is swapped out?

Hmm, I probably should have reread that - the context of the comment is
lost.

I added the comment when changing to pte_access_permitted(), and the
comment on pte_access_permitted() explains a potential gotcha:

 * p??_access_permitted() is true for valid user mappings (PTE_USER
 * bit set, subject to the write permission check). For execute-only
 * mappings, like PROT_EXEC with EPAN (both PTE_USER and PTE_UXN bits
 * not set) must return false. PROT_NONE mappings do not have the
 * PTE_VALID bit set.

So execute-only mappings return false even though that is effectively a
type of user access. However, because MTE checks are not performed by
the PE for instruction fetches this doesn't matter. I'll update the
comment, how about:

/*
 * If the PTE would provide user space access to the tags associated
 * with it then ensure that the MTE tags are synchronised.  Although
 * pte_access_permitted() returns false for exec only mappings, they
 * don't expose tags (instruction fetches don't check tags).
 */

Thanks,

Steve

> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.
> 
>> +	 */
>> +	if (system_supports_mte() && pte_present(pte) &&
>> +	    pte_access_permitted(pte, false) && !pte_special(pte))
>>  		mte_sync_tags(ptep, pte);
>>  
>>  	__check_racy_pte_update(mm, ptep, pte);
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> index c88e778c2fa9..a604818c52c1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>> @@ -33,11 +33,15 @@ DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(mte_async_mode);
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mte_async_mode);
>>  #endif
>>  
>> -static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap)
>> +static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap,
>> +			       bool pte_is_tagged)
>>  {
>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>  	pte_t old_pte = READ_ONCE(*ptep);
>>  
>> +	if (!is_swap_pte(old_pte) && !pte_is_tagged)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>  	spin_lock_irqsave(&tag_sync_lock, flags);
>>  
>>  	/* Recheck with the lock held */
>> @@ -53,6 +57,9 @@ static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap)
>>  		}
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	if (!pte_is_tagged)
>> +		goto out;
>> +
>>  	page_kasan_tag_reset(page);
>>  	/*
>>  	 * We need smp_wmb() in between setting the flags and clearing the
>> @@ -76,10 +83,15 @@ void mte_sync_tags(pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
>>  	bool check_swap = nr_pages == 1;
>>  	bool pte_is_tagged = pte_tagged(pte);
>>  
>> +	/* Early out if there's nothing to do */
>> +	if (!check_swap && !pte_is_tagged)
>> +		return;
>> +
>>  	/* if PG_mte_tagged is set, tags have already been initialised */
>>  	for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++, page++) {
>>  		if (!test_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags))
>> -			mte_sync_page_tags(page, ptep, check_swap);
>> +			mte_sync_page_tags(page, ptep, check_swap,
>> +					   pte_is_tagged);
>>  	}
>>  }
>>  
>> -- 
>> 2.20.1
>>
>>
> 


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

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-19  9:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 196+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-17 12:32 [PATCH v12 0/8] MTE support for KVM guest Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32 ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32 ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32 ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32 ` [PATCH v12 1/8] arm64: mte: Handle race when synchronising tags Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 14:03   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 14:03     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 14:03     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 14:03     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 14:56     ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 14:56       ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 14:56       ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 14:56       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 17:32   ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 17:32     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 17:32     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 17:32     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-17 12:32 ` [PATCH v12 2/8] arm64: Handle MTE tags zeroing in __alloc_zeroed_user_highpage() Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32 ` [PATCH v12 3/8] arm64: mte: Sync tags for pages where PTE is untagged Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 16:14   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 16:14     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 16:14     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 16:14     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-19  9:32     ` Steven Price [this message]
2021-05-19  9:32       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19  9:32       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19  9:32       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 17:48       ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 17:48         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 17:48         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 17:48         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 18:06   ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 18:06     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 18:06     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-19 18:06     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 11:55     ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 11:55       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 11:55       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 11:55       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 12:25       ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 12:25         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 12:25         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 12:25         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 13:02         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 13:02           ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 13:02           ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 13:02           ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 13:03         ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 13:03           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 13:03           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 13:03           ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32 ` [PATCH v12 4/8] arm64: kvm: Introduce MTE VM feature Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 16:45   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 16:45     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 16:45     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 16:45     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-19 10:48     ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 10:48       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 10:48       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 10:48       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20  8:51       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20  8:51         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20  8:51         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20  8:51         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 14:46         ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 14:46           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 14:46           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 14:46           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 11:54   ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 11:54     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 11:54     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 11:54     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 15:05     ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 15:05       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 15:05       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 15:05       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 17:50       ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 17:50         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 17:50         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 17:50         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-21  9:28         ` Steven Price
2021-05-21  9:28           ` Steven Price
2021-05-21  9:28           ` Steven Price
2021-05-21  9:28           ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32 ` [PATCH v12 5/8] arm64: kvm: Save/restore MTE registers Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 17:17   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 17:17     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 17:17     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 17:17     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-19 13:04     ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 13:04       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 13:04       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 13:04       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20  9:46       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20  9:46         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20  9:46         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20  9:46         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 15:21         ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 15:21           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 15:21           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 15:21           ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32 ` [PATCH v12 6/8] arm64: kvm: Expose KVM_ARM_CAP_MTE Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 17:40   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 17:40     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 17:40     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 17:40     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-19 13:26     ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 13:26       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 13:26       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 13:26       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 10:09       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 10:09         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 10:09         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 10:09         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 10:51         ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 10:51           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 10:51           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 10:51           ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32 ` [PATCH v12 7/8] KVM: arm64: ioctl to fetch/store tags in a guest Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 18:04   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 18:04     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 18:04     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 18:04     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-19 13:51     ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 13:51       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 13:51       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 13:51       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 12:05   ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 12:05     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 12:05     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 12:05     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 15:58     ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 15:58       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 15:58       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 15:58       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 17:27       ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 17:27         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 17:27         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-20 17:27         ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-21  9:42         ` Steven Price
2021-05-21  9:42           ` Steven Price
2021-05-21  9:42           ` Steven Price
2021-05-21  9:42           ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 18:11           ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-24 18:11             ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-24 18:11             ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-24 18:11             ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-27  7:50             ` Steven Price
2021-05-27  7:50               ` Steven Price
2021-05-27  7:50               ` Steven Price
2021-05-27  7:50               ` Steven Price
2021-05-27 13:08               ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-27 13:08                 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-27 13:08                 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-27 13:08                 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-17 12:32 ` [PATCH v12 8/8] KVM: arm64: Document MTE capability and ioctl Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 12:32   ` Steven Price
2021-05-17 18:09   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 18:09     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 18:09     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-17 18:09     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-19 14:09     ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 14:09       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 14:09       ` Steven Price
2021-05-19 14:09       ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 10:24       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 10:24         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 10:24         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 10:24         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-20 10:52         ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 10:52           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 10:52           ` Steven Price
2021-05-20 10:52           ` 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=f3a3f560-4d2b-9cd3-bbf4-ea8135ab4d17@arm.com \
    --to=steven.price@arm.com \
    --cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
    --cc=Haibo.Xu@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@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=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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.