On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 06:29:35PM +0200, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > On 10/08/2013 04:55 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote: > >On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:45:18PM +0200, Christian König wrote: > >>Am 08.10.2013 16:33, schrieb Jerome Glisse: > >>>On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:14:40PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > >>>>Allocate and copy all kernel memory before doing reservations. This prevents a locking > >>>>inversion between mmap_sem and reservation_class, and allows us to drop the trylocking > >>>>in ttm_bo_vm_fault without upsetting lockdep. > >>>> > >>>>Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>I would say NAK. Current code only allocate temporary page in AGP case. > >>>So AGP case is userspace -> temp page -> cs checker -> radeon ib. > >>> > >>>Non AGP is directly memcpy to radeon IB. > >>> > >>>Your patch allocate memory memcpy userspace to it and it will then be > >>>memcpy to IB. Which means you introduce an extra memcpy in the process > >>>not something we want. > >>Totally agree. Additional to that there is no good reason to provide > >>anything else than anonymous system memory to the CS ioctl, so the > >>dependency between the mmap_sem and reservations are not really > >>clear to me. > >> > >>Christian. > >I think is that in other code path you take mmap_sem first then reserve > >bo. But here we reserve bo and then we take mmap_sem because of copy > >from user. > > > >Cheers, > >Jerome > > > Actually the log message is a little confusing. I think the mmap_sem > locking inversion problem is orthogonal to what's being fixed here. > > This patch fixes the possible recursive bo::reserve caused by > malicious user-space handing a pointer to ttm memory so that the ttm > fault handler is called when bos are already reserved. That may > cause a (possibly interruptible) livelock. > > Once that is fixed, we are free to choose the mmap_sem -> > bo::reserve locking order. Currently it's bo::reserve->mmap_sem(), > but the hack required in the ttm fault handler is admittedly a bit > ugly. The plan is to change the locking order to > mmap_sem->bo::reserve > > I'm not sure if it applies to this particular case, but it should be > possible to make sure that copy_from_user_inatomic() will always > succeed, by making sure the pages are present using > get_user_pages(), and release the pages after > copy_from_user_inatomic() is done. That way there's no need for a > double memcpy slowpath, but if the copied data is very fragmented I > guess the resulting code may look ugly. The get_user_pages() > function will return an error if it hits TTM pages. > > /Thomas get_user_pages + copy_from_user_inatomic is overkill. We should just do get_user_pages which fails with ttm memory and then use copy_highpage helper. Cheers, Jerome _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
