Re: [PATCH v6 08/12] s390/mm: Clear skeys for newly mapped huge guest pmds

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 13.07.2018 08:36, Janosch Frank wrote:
> Similarly to the pte skey handling, where we set the storage key to
> the default key for each newly mapped pte, we have to also do that for
> huge pmds.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/s390/mm/pgtable.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/pgtable.c b/arch/s390/mm/pgtable.c
> index c393a6b0f362..6550ed56fcdf 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/mm/pgtable.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/pgtable.c
> @@ -410,14 +410,34 @@ static inline pmd_t pmdp_flush_lazy(struct mm_struct *mm,
>  	return old;
>  }
>  
> +static void pmdp_clear_skeys(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmdp, pmd_t new)
> +{
> +	unsigned long paddr = pmd_val(new) & HPAGE_MASK;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * After a guest has used the first storage key instruction,
> +	 * we must ensure, that each newly mapped huge pmd has all
> +	 * skeys cleared before mapping it.
> +	 */
> +	if (!mm_uses_skeys(mm) ||
> +	    !pmd_none(*pmdp) ||
> +	    !pmd_large(new) ||
> +	    (pmd_val(new) & _SEGMENT_ENTRY_INVALID))
> +		return;
> +
> +	__storage_key_init_range(paddr, paddr + HPAGE_SIZE - 1);

I am by far not an expert on this :)

I wonder if it could happen that we zero-over already used keys (e.g.
changing protection of a pmd entry ?). I hope Martin can review this one.

> +}
> +
>  pmd_t pmdp_xchg_direct(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>  		       pmd_t *pmdp, pmd_t new)
>  {
>  	pmd_t old;
>  
>  	preempt_disable();
> -	if (mm_has_pgste(mm))
> +	if (mm_has_pgste(mm)) {
> +		pmdp_clear_skeys(mm, pmdp, new);
>  		pmdp_notify(mm, addr);

I wonder if mm_has_pgste(mm) is the right to check for here. AFAICS,
s390_enable_skey() does not really rely on PGSTE to be around
("theoretically" in contrast to pgste_set_key()).

Shouldn't this rather be

if (mm_uses_skeys(mm))
	pmdp_clear_skeys(mm, pmdp, new);

(so you can remove the inner check). So you'd even have one check less.

> +	}
>  	old = pmdp_flush_direct(mm, addr, pmdp);
>  	*pmdp = new;
>  	preempt_enable();
> @@ -431,8 +451,10 @@ pmd_t pmdp_xchg_lazy(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>  	pmd_t old;
>  
>  	preempt_disable();
> -	if (mm_has_pgste(mm))
> +	if (mm_has_pgste(mm)) {
> +		pmdp_clear_skeys(mm, pmdp, new);
>  		pmdp_notify(mm, addr);
> +	}
>  	old = pmdp_flush_lazy(mm, addr, pmdp);
>  	*pmdp = new;
>  	preempt_enable();
> 


-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux