Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210111214452.1826-2-tony.luck@intel.com> <E1FCB534-9149-437A-971E-F93C009F99C3@amacapital.net>
 <20210111222057.GA2369@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> <CALCETrVhRF0H+R1aiy-rdguL3A_9M35R3roVAgRGaEAMCJVW0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210112171628.GA15664@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> <CALCETrWijyKoopqAHjohMbvfX191GhmMVQCQjKWx1s3+SA+-uA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210112182357.GA16390@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210112182357.GA16390@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jan 2021 10:57:07 -0800
Message-ID: <CALCETrXw59WDTwfoZHVtDrveMpFF=Eh4jaOF7vFsF02Zk54mDw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/mce: Avoid infinite loop for copy from user recovery
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-edac <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 10:24 AM Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 09:21:21AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > Well, we need to do *something* when the first __get_user() trips the
> > #MC.  It would be nice if we could actually fix up the page tables
> > inside the #MC handler, but, if we're in a pagefault_disable() context
> > we might have locks held.  Heck, we could have the pagetable lock
> > held, be inside NMI, etc.  Skipping the task_work_add() might actually
> > make sense if we get a second one.
> >
> > We won't actually infinite loop in pagefault_disable() context -- if
> > we would, then we would also infinite loop just from a regular page
> > fault, too.
>
> Fixing the page tables inside the #MC handler to unmap the poison
> page would indeed be a good solution. But, as you point out, not possible
> because of locks.
>
> Could we take a more drastic approach? We know that this case the kernel
> is accessing a user address for the current process. Could the machine
> check handler just re-write %cr3 to point to a kernel-only page table[1].
> I.e. unmap the entire current user process.

That seems scary, especially if we're in the middle of a context
switch when this happens.  We *could* make it work, but I'm not at all
convinced it's wise.

>
> Then any subsequent access to user space will page fault. Maybe have a
> flag in the task structure to help the #PF handler understand what just
> happened.
>
> The code we execute in the task_work handler can restore %cr3

This would need to be integrated with something much more local IMO.
Maybe it could be scoped to pagefault_disable()/pagefault_enable()?

--Andy