Received: by 10.213.65.68 with SMTP id h4csp179698imn; Tue, 3 Apr 2018 18:18:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+RhhepBjJyWcSx/+V5XYva6xq5Qi9Ps2j05rP5e748klovAEqZfjxiPZhe1qhhPb04reAe X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:5681:: with SMTP id j1-v6mr16526918pli.383.1522804684556; Tue, 03 Apr 2018 18:18:04 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1522804684; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=L8TWcr87AVkV0X2Jfn8tc9+UUzfixEatIIM/J+aMh4LwczKdX7IJqjWLHH8ey+E0fO b6L54cVGjRKU5NzlqgVQVYcGiT9repJHZyJWHbzGr7Yn1DjqrC5AdYIfZUT+mkWXieeB JeeBoymtZyTvm+cz+HmhLyKl0niymMD4NdpXVFEG4U9PvEowdrIOZwt/UlD2C60d2Yf5 nz/dyciV2TkTY8CrQYBxpDHl2aL9i22GRAvTyrJHsisuYLOSMCAg9A0Ra8ohGj/VEvPu WsQiyu1O/6g4kkbrPHSqF61oXwkfWdi1d+VmeXD12Xivj7hfjv+0tML7+NRR4kDt3TJ6 kFTQ== 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=8xVac6wkoIBio/6NtEb/ZkQqpSl5hkpXcgIFm1bnIJY=; b=zv5PPZqM4OLILxJe6xP1OyfrMH/kFApujvOdKhMs9z9iNBZrGPN+AeXb+AXucxTNe6 WzZsV0qvY5ZVhHd+2lnMPBYxhED2o4Wg0DyVhDm2BYvd3u8ArNB05QpZ6NNmXyNoOk9h zx6oeiDOHp5lpNetkyZPku+9jM9/x/he9rQFSVkiOnfqdAD4RATr/1zWiaDaLR6E4Nlc OwqnRngOtStL/1f0ZWXTY57/aao2Zse1pyG3Qm3bwsYxTFNhoaTwhFDdLj9PEMH4kHzm +XXdKD7LWyodKVFmVxnPV0cwuEBQVgdoZYKWI8Zmstbfrxsoz488oWI2UwOfcbqahc2f 9ZDg== 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 y136si3212822pfg.81.2018.04.03.18.17.50; Tue, 03 Apr 2018 18:18:04 -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 S1754843AbeDDBMh (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 3 Apr 2018 21:12:37 -0400 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:51156 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754710AbeDDBMe (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Apr 2018 21:12:34 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Apr 2018 18:12:34 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,403,1517904000"; d="scan'208";a="30823555" Received: from viggo.jf.intel.com (HELO localhost.localdomain) ([10.54.39.119]) by orsmga008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Apr 2018 18:12:34 -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: Tue, 03 Apr 2018 18:09:48 -0700 References: <20180404010946.6186729B@viggo.jf.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20180404010946.6186729B@viggo.jf.intel.com> Message-Id: <20180404010948.548BE9FA@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 2018-04-02 16:41:13.124605178 -0700 +++ b/arch/x86/mm/pageattr.c 2018-04-02 16:41:13.128605178 -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; _