MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20211210095432.51798-1-jianyong.wu@arm.com> <1e63e2f7-0563-2866-4665-84fe220b615f@arm.com>
 <CAMj1kXF3Kf_OP-EL6oRfstw6VdEaqowVPioABxfMv+1FnPvfew@mail.gmail.com> <20211213134503.GD11570@willie-the-truck>
In-Reply-To: <20211213134503.GD11570@willie-the-truck>
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:01:55 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXH0qTEiUyJLxr8YJhpWc_iLCN9-30KD_WTyUfKga9O3YA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64/mm: avoid fixmap race condition when create pud mapping
To:     Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc:     Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
        Jianyong Wu <jianyong.wu@arm.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>, Jia He <justin.he@arm.com>,
        nd <nd@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 14:45, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 11:35:16AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 11:16, Anshuman Khandual
> > <anshuman.khandual@arm.com> wrote:
> > > On 12/10/21 3:24 PM, Jianyong Wu wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > > > index acfae9b41cc8..98ac09ae9588 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > > > @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ static pmd_t bm_pmd[PTRS_PER_PMD] __page_aligned_bss __maybe_unused;
> > > >  static pud_t bm_pud[PTRS_PER_PUD] __page_aligned_bss __maybe_unused;
> > > >
> > > >  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(swapper_pgdir_lock);
> > > > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(fixmap_lock);
> > > >
> > > >  void set_swapper_pgd(pgd_t *pgdp, pgd_t pgd)
> > > >  {
> > > > @@ -329,6 +330,11 @@ static void alloc_init_pud(pgd_t *pgdp, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
> > > >       }
> > > >       BUG_ON(p4d_bad(p4d));
> > > >
> > > > +     /*
> > > > +      * fixmap is global resource, thus it needs to be protected by a lock
> > > > +      * in case of race condition.
> > > > +      */
> > >
> > > Small nit, format and align this comment block. I guess
> > > could also be done while merging this patch as well.
> > >
> > > > +     spin_lock(&fixmap_lock);
> > > >       pudp = pud_set_fixmap_offset(p4dp, addr);
> > > >       do {
> > > >               pud_t old_pud = READ_ONCE(*pudp);
> > > > @@ -359,6 +365,7 @@ static void alloc_init_pud(pgd_t *pgdp, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
> > > >       } while (pudp++, addr = next, addr != end);
> > > >
> > > >       pud_clear_fixmap();
> > > > +     spin_unlock(&fixmap_lock);
> > > >  }
> > > >
> > > >  static void __create_pgd_mapping(pgd_t *pgdir, phys_addr_t phys,
> > > >
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
> >
> > We have different fixmap slots for different page table levels, so
> > 'fixmap_lock' is not the right name.
> >
> > But we already have swapper_pgdir_lock as well, which serializes the
> > use of the pgdir level fixmap slot. And we have no spinlocks
> > protecting the other levels.
> >
> > So should we perhaps clean this up more comprehensively? Wouldn't it
> > be better to add a mutex to __create_pgd_mapping(), for instance?
>
> That does sound like a better way to do things, but the simplicity of this
> patch is quite attractive for backporting. Would you object to me queuing
> it as-is, on the premise that I'm more than happy to take consolidation
> changes on top?
>

No objections from me.