On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 23:59:32 -0800 John Hubbard <jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 3/2/20 4:25 PM, Claudio Imbrenda wrote: > > With the introduction of protected KVM guests on s390 there is now a > > concept of inaccessible pages. These pages need to be made > > accessible before the host can access them. > > > > While cpu accesses will trigger a fault that can be resolved, I/O > > accesses will just fail. We need to add a callback into > > architecture code for places that will do I/O, namely when > > writeback is started or when a page reference is taken. > > > > This is not only to enable paging, file backing etc, it is also > > necessary to protect the host against a malicious user space. For > > example a bad QEMU could simply start direct I/O on such protected > > memory. We do not want userspace to be able to trigger I/O errors > > and thus the logic is "whenever somebody accesses that page (gup) > > or does I/O, make sure that this page can be accessed". When the > > guest tries to access that page we will wait in the page fault > > handler for writeback to have finished and for the page_ref to be > > the expected value. > > > > On s390x the function is not supposed to fail, so it is ok to use a > > WARN_ON on failure. If we ever need some more finegrained handling > > we can tackle this when we know the details. > > > > Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > include/linux/gfp.h | 6 ++++++ > > mm/gup.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > mm/page-writeback.c | 5 +++++ > > 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h > > index e5b817cb86e7..be2754841369 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/gfp.h > > +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h > > @@ -485,6 +485,12 @@ static inline void arch_free_page(struct page > > *page, int order) { } #ifndef HAVE_ARCH_ALLOC_PAGE > > static inline void arch_alloc_page(struct page *page, int order) > > { } #endif > > +#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_MAKE_PAGE_ACCESSIBLE > > +static inline int arch_make_page_accessible(struct page *page) > > +{ > > + return 0; > > +} > > +#endif > > > > struct page * > > __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int > > preferred_nid, diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c > > index 81a95fbe9901..15c47e0e86f8 100644 > > --- a/mm/gup.c > > +++ b/mm/gup.c > > @@ -413,6 +413,7 @@ static struct page *follow_page_pte(struct > > vm_area_struct *vma, struct page *page; > > spinlock_t *ptl; > > pte_t *ptep, pte; > > + int ret; > > > > /* FOLL_GET and FOLL_PIN are mutually exclusive. */ > > if (WARN_ON_ONCE((flags & (FOLL_PIN | FOLL_GET)) == > > @@ -471,8 +472,6 @@ static struct page *follow_page_pte(struct > > vm_area_struct *vma, if (is_zero_pfn(pte_pfn(pte))) { > > page = pte_page(pte); > > } else { > > - int ret; > > - > > ret = follow_pfn_pte(vma, address, ptep, > > flags); page = ERR_PTR(ret); > > goto out; > > @@ -480,7 +479,6 @@ static struct page *follow_page_pte(struct > > vm_area_struct *vma, } > > > > if (flags & FOLL_SPLIT && PageTransCompound(page)) { > > - int ret; > > get_page(page); > > pte_unmap_unlock(ptep, ptl); > > lock_page(page); > > @@ -497,6 +495,19 @@ static struct page *follow_page_pte(struct > > vm_area_struct *vma, page = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); > > goto out; > > } > > + /* > > + * We need to make the page accessible if we are actually > > going to > > + * poke at its content (pin), otherwise we can leave it > > inaccessible. > > + * If we cannot make the page accessible, fail. > > + */ > > + if (flags & FOLL_PIN) { > > + ret = arch_make_page_accessible(page); > > + if (ret) { > > + unpin_user_page(page); > > + page = ERR_PTR(ret); > > + goto out; > > + } > > + } > > > That looks good. > > > > if (flags & FOLL_TOUCH) { > > if ((flags & FOLL_WRITE) && > > !pte_dirty(pte) && !PageDirty(page)) > > @@ -2162,6 +2173,16 @@ static int gup_pte_range(pmd_t pmd, unsigned > > long addr, unsigned long end, > > VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(compound_head(page) != head, page); > > > > + /* > > + * We need to make the page accessible if we are > > actually > > + * going to poke at its content (pin), otherwise > > we can > > + * leave it inaccessible. If the page cannot be > > made > > + * accessible, fail. > > + */ > > > This part looks good, so these two points are just nits: > > That's a little bit of repeating what the code does, in the comments. > How about: > > /* > * We need to make the page accessible if and only if > we are > * going to access its content (the FOLL_PIN case). > Please see > * Documentation/core-api/pin_user_pages.rst for > details. */ > > > > + if ((flags & FOLL_PIN) && > > arch_make_page_accessible(page)) { > > + unpin_user_page(page); > > + goto pte_unmap; > > + } > > > Your style earlier in the patch was easier on the reader, why not > stay consistent with that (and with this file, which tends also to do > this), so: > > if (flags & FOLL_PIN) { > ret = arch_make_page_accessible(page); > if (ret) { > unpin_user_page(page); > goto pte_unmap; > } > } > > > > > > SetPageReferenced(page); > > pages[*nr] = page; > > (*nr)++; > > diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c > > index ab5a3cee8ad3..8384be5a2758 100644 > > --- a/mm/page-writeback.c > > +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c > > @@ -2807,6 +2807,11 @@ int __test_set_page_writeback(struct page > > *page, bool keep_write) inc_zone_page_state(page, > > NR_ZONE_WRITE_PENDING); } > > unlock_page_memcg(page); > > + /* > > + * If writeback has been triggered on a page that cannot > > be made > > + * accessible, it is too late. > > + */ > > + WARN_ON(arch_make_page_accessible(page)); > > > I'm not deep enough into this area to know if a) this is correct, and > b) if there are any other places that need > arch_make_page_accessible() calls. So I'll rely on other reviewers to > help check on that. > > > > return ret; > > > > } > > > > Anyway, I don't see any problems, and as I said, those documentation > and style points are just nitpicks, not bugs. these are minor fixes, and I mostly agree with you. I'll fix them and send a v3 soon™ thanks for the comments!