Received: by 10.213.65.68 with SMTP id h4csp581350imn; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:52:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvkFJSWDMT+aht320NUAK30rQuIt7jtP738mSWXbSA3qsSd5sYpLZUUN8sIG4V5VtHvQvuq X-Received: by 10.98.63.75 with SMTP id m72mr20344052pfa.167.1521827523033; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:52:03 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1521827522; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=cl45DOxSUiYrFLyn5sdzMyw3ypmR2iqJs9x14D4KVUv0QzfxODXOSigMll0Ms7rKbz ZfechZEUh5cz5MCgHOiXU6vRbxFETNmog7QUxqiyyC34Emk0dicgHuM1cGZqtoFClJDW xYe5bwTmoXuBsLuPq884xlS2lEpFJjtWm00GCWb6YIifCpeYsqTyF84aR0A6cEymmT1G EbtVQstexBNnUrkYqVg7N0twZwnwdekE68xp6Y0Z/YxC7mauTYhjTrbIfjN9lx8Z9xoF VqdpMMGjPWALwOnJcLfalAGg5ZjbhsYGNQIHcJNH/jF6l6X3G774LWon3O3NZKPg6xwU x3jw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date :from:cc:to:subject:arc-authentication-results; bh=p7CqByXpk1ApTW54g/zDj168roVkzO9aAo7TMhGc+m8=; b=BotI/Zte47ctwE6Ovwae6RE06wpVoXCsJy/0fH8ViRvQas09xhEf3hpZclo8j1XKnd hANbxPX8CIQ7knXKPITRv42Jpx88iP1BDmwaejb7mpBpCMEdXFQp2dqDVOPFP4EeO9/J qN9qWuTZMV7Kbi9h4/AGsdr5U9mUUfBa+fP693v0RTR0HamKT5HiI9rV12vXwwZ41AGa 8ICaKaJ1g6XkJu3UW836FIeStMRNJNi4j+idDZjbqcTmrpEuteKm2dHasxtKvAdlSGRo NvtzKykkOORvls0RFJxB3BOMWAhUK+hji20k5kTd9JAz7ZZmvfEUOceHlkGg5NORCgTh bI2Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 9si446072pgg.286.2018.03.23.10.51.48; Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:52:02 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752538AbeCWRuT (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 23 Mar 2018 13:50:19 -0400 Received: from mga12.intel.com ([192.55.52.136]:61817 "EHLO mga12.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752209AbeCWRqw (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Mar 2018 13:46:52 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Mar 2018 10:46:51 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,351,1517904000"; d="scan'208";a="37596465" Received: from viggo.jf.intel.com (HELO localhost.localdomain) ([10.54.39.119]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Mar 2018 10:46:51 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 02/11] x86/mm: undo double _PAGE_PSE clearing To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Hansen , aarcange@redhat.com, luto@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, keescook@google.com, hughd@google.com, jgross@suse.com, x86@kernel.org, namit@vmware.com From: Dave Hansen Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 10:44:50 -0700 References: <20180323174447.55F35636@viggo.jf.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20180323174447.55F35636@viggo.jf.intel.com> Message-Id: <20180323174450.C9B99634@viggo.jf.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Dave Hansen When clearing _PAGE_PRESENT on a huge page, we need to be careful to also clear _PAGE_PSE, otherwise it might still get confused for a valid large page table entry. We do that near the spot where we *set* _PAGE_PSE. That's fine, but it's unnecessary. pgprot_large_2_4k() already did it. BTW, I also noticed that pgprot_large_2_4k() and pgprot_4k_2_large() are not symmetric. pgprot_large_2_4k() clears _PAGE_PSE (because it is aliased to _PAGE_PAT) but pgprot_4k_2_large() does not put _PAGE_PSE back. Bummer. Also, add some comments and change "promote" to "move". "Promote" seems an odd word to move when we are logically moving a bit to a lower bit position. Also add an extra line return to make it clear to which line the comment applies. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen Cc: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Kees Cook Cc: Hugh Dickins Cc: Juergen Gross Cc: x86@kernel.org Cc: Nadav Amit --- b/arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c | 9 ++++++--- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff -puN arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c~kpti-undo-double-_PAGE_PSE-clear arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c --- a/arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c~kpti-undo-double-_PAGE_PSE-clear 2018-03-21 16:31:56.803192321 -0700 +++ b/arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c 2018-03-21 16:31:56.806192321 -0700 @@ -583,6 +583,7 @@ try_preserve_large_page(pte_t *kpte, uns * up accordingly. */ old_pte = *kpte; + /* Clear PSE (aka _PAGE_PAT) and move PAT bit to correct position */ req_prot = pgprot_large_2_4k(old_prot); pgprot_val(req_prot) &= ~pgprot_val(cpa->mask_clr); @@ -597,8 +598,6 @@ try_preserve_large_page(pte_t *kpte, uns req_prot = pgprot_clear_protnone_bits(req_prot); if (pgprot_val(req_prot) & _PAGE_PRESENT) pgprot_val(req_prot) |= _PAGE_PSE; - else - pgprot_val(req_prot) &= ~_PAGE_PSE; req_prot = canon_pgprot(req_prot); /* @@ -684,8 +683,12 @@ __split_large_page(struct cpa_data *cpa, switch (level) { case PG_LEVEL_2M: ref_prot = pmd_pgprot(*(pmd_t *)kpte); - /* clear PSE and promote PAT bit to correct position */ + /* + * Clear PSE (aka _PAGE_PAT) and move + * PAT bit to correct position. + */ ref_prot = pgprot_large_2_4k(ref_prot); + ref_pfn = pmd_pfn(*(pmd_t *)kpte); break; _