Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-96198-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 20:31:46 +0000
In-Reply-To: <updn6j7jcqdru73vwt3fvxlx4t73rjrlk7h6i6js3lizeueoov@tz7fyrd3a4yi>
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
References: <20240307133916.3782068-1-yosryahmed@google.com>
 <20240307133916.3782068-2-yosryahmed@google.com> <updn6j7jcqdru73vwt3fvxlx4t73rjrlk7h6i6js3lizeueoov@tz7fyrd3a4yi>
Message-ID: <ZeokMhiB2MhTlIXP@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] x86/mm: fix LAM cr3 mask inconsistency during
 context switch
From: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, 
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>, 
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org, 
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 07:22:36PM +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 01:39:14PM +0000, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > In switch_mm_irqs_off(), we read the 'mm->context.lam_cr3_mask' into
> > 'new_lam', which is later passed to load_new_mm_cr3(). However, there is
> > a call to set_tlbstate_lam_mode() in between which will read
> > 'mm->context.lam_cr3_mask' again and set 'cpu_tlbstate.lam' accordingly.
> > If we race with another thread updating 'mm->context.lam_cr3_mask', the
> > value in 'cpu_tlbstate.lam' could end up being different from CR3.
> 
> What other thread? LAM can only be enabled when the process has single
> thread. And cannot be disabled. See MM_CONTEXT_LOCK_LAM.

Right, but a kthread may run with that single-threaded process's mm
IIUC. I think this can happen via kthread_use_mm() or if we context
switch directly from the user process to the kthread (context_switch()
doesn't seem to update the mm in this case).

> 
> > While we are at it, remove the misguiding comment that states that
> > 'new_lam' may not match tlbstate_lam_cr3_mask() if a race occurs.
> 
> The comment is indeed misguiding, but for different reason. It is leftover
> from the earlier version of LAM patchset.