|
Message-ID: <588ab9ec4751e060068c1af213e5a170f7d4284e.camel@intel.com> Date: Wed, 5 May 2021 21:54:25 +0000 From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com> To: "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>, "rppt@...nel.org" <rppt@...nel.org> CC: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>, "luto@...nel.org" <luto@...nel.org>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, "linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>, "Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 5/9] x86, mm: Use cache of page tables On Wed, 2021-05-05 at 15:19 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 03:09:09PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 10:51:55AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 05:30:28PM -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote: > > > > @@ -54,6 +98,8 @@ void ___pte_free_tlb(struct mmu_gather *tlb, > > > > struct page *pte) > > > > { > > > > pgtable_pte_page_dtor(pte); > > > > paravirt_release_pte(page_to_pfn(pte)); > > > > + /* Set Page Table so swap knows how to free it */ > > > > + __SetPageTable(pte); > > > > paravirt_tlb_remove_table(tlb, pte); > > > > } > > > > > > > > @@ -70,12 +116,16 @@ void ___pmd_free_tlb(struct mmu_gather > > > > *tlb, pmd_t *pmd) > > > > tlb->need_flush_all = 1; > > > > #endif > > > > pgtable_pmd_page_dtor(page); > > > > + /* Set Page Table so swap nows how to free it */ > > > > + __SetPageTable(virt_to_page(pmd)); > > > > paravirt_tlb_remove_table(tlb, page); > > > > } > > > > > > > > #if CONFIG_PGTABLE_LEVELS > 3 > > > > void ___pud_free_tlb(struct mmu_gather *tlb, pud_t *pud) > > > > { > > > > + /* Set Page Table so swap nows how to free it */ > > > > + __SetPageTable(virt_to_page(pud)); > > > > paravirt_release_pud(__pa(pud) >> PAGE_SHIFT); > > > > paravirt_tlb_remove_table(tlb, virt_to_page(pud)); > > > > } > > > > @@ -83,6 +133,8 @@ void ___pud_free_tlb(struct mmu_gather *tlb, > > > > pud_t *pud) > > > > #if CONFIG_PGTABLE_LEVELS > 4 > > > > void ___p4d_free_tlb(struct mmu_gather *tlb, p4d_t *p4d) > > > > { > > > > + /* Set Page Table so swap nows how to free it */ > > > > + __SetPageTable(virt_to_page(p4d)); > > > > paravirt_release_p4d(__pa(p4d) >> PAGE_SHIFT); > > > > paravirt_tlb_remove_table(tlb, virt_to_page(p4d)); > > > > } > > > > > > This, to me, seems like a really weird place to __SetPageTable(), > > > why > > > can't we do that on allocation? > > > > We call __ClearPageTable() at pgtable_pxy_page_dtor(), so at least > > for pte > > and pmd we need to somehow tell release_pages() what kind of page > > it was. > > Hurph, right, but then the added comment is misleading; > s/Set/Reset/g. > Still I'm thinking that if we do these allocators, moving the > set/clear > to the allocator would be the most natural place, perhaps we can > remove > them from the {c,d}tor. Hmm, yes. I guess there could be just x86 specific versions of the ctor/dtor that don't set the flag. Seems like it should work and be less confusing. Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.