From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/6] vdso/extable: fix calculation of base
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2021 01:20:48 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <194EFB5E-46DE-4FEB-BCD5-3281B4C2A097@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YDk0Ld5TIEnhA0Cb@google.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2982 bytes --]
> On Feb 26, 2021, at 9:47 AM, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 25, 2021, at 1:16 PM, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
>>> It's been literally years since I wrote this code, but I distinctly remember the
>>> addresses being relative to the base. I also remember testing multiple entries,
>>> but again, that was a long time ago.
>>>
>>> Assuming things have changed, or I was flat out wrong, the comment above the
>>> macro magic should also be updated.
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * Inject exception fixup for vDSO code. Unlike normal exception fixup,
>>> * vDSO uses a dedicated handler the addresses are relative to the overall
>>> * exception table, not each individual entry.
>>> */
>>
>> I will update the comment. I am not very familiar with pushsection stuff,
>> but the offsets were wrong.
>>
>> Since you say you checked it, I wonder whether it can somehow be caused
>> by having exception table entries defined from multiple object files.
>
> Oooh, I think that would do it. Have you checked what happens if there are
> multiple object files and multiple fixups within an object file?
Good thing that you insisted...
I certainly do not know well enough the assembly section directives,
but indeed it seems (after some experiments) that referring to the
section provides different values from different objects.
So both the current (yours) and this patch (mine) are broken. I think
the easiest thing is to fall back to the kernel exception table scheme.
I checked the following with both entries in the same and different
objects and it seems to work correctly:
-- >8 --
diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/extable.c b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/extable.c
index afcf5b65beef..3f395b782553 100644
--- a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/extable.c
+++ b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/extable.c
@@ -32,9 +32,11 @@ bool fixup_vdso_exception(struct pt_regs *regs, int trapnr,
nr_entries = image->extable_len / (sizeof(*extable));
extable = image->extable;
- for (i = 0; i < nr_entries; i++) {
- if (regs->ip == base + extable[i].insn) {
- regs->ip = base + extable[i].fixup;
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_entries; i++, base += sizeof(*extable)) {
+ if (regs->ip == base + extable[i].insn +
+ offsetof(struct vdso_exception_table_entry, insn)) {
+ regs->ip = base + extable[i].fixup +
+ offsetof(struct vdso_exception_table_entry, fixup);
regs->di = trapnr;
regs->si = error_code;
regs->dx = fault_addr;
diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/extable.h b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/extable.h
index b56f6b012941..4ffe3d533148 100644
--- a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/extable.h
+++ b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/extable.h
@@ -13,8 +13,8 @@
.macro ASM_VDSO_EXTABLE_HANDLE from:req to:req
.pushsection __ex_table, "a"
- .long (\from) - __ex_table
- .long (\to) - __ex_table
+ .long (\from) - .
+ .long (\to) - .
.popsection
.endm
#else
--
2.25.1
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-28 9:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-25 7:29 [RFC 0/6] x86: prefetch_page() vDSO call Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 7:29 ` [RFC 1/6] vdso/extable: fix calculation of base Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 21:16 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-02-26 17:24 ` Nadav Amit
2021-02-26 17:47 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-02-28 9:20 ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2021-02-25 7:29 ` [RFC 2/6] x86/vdso: add mask and flags to extable Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 7:29 ` [RFC 3/6] x86/vdso: introduce page_prefetch() Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 7:29 ` [RFC 4/6] mm/swap_state: respect FAULT_FLAG_RETRY_NOWAIT Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 7:29 ` [RFC 5/6] mm: use lightweight reclaim on FAULT_FLAG_RETRY_NOWAIT Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 7:29 ` [PATCH 6/6] testing/selftest: test vDSO prefetch_page() Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 8:40 ` [RFC 0/6] x86: prefetch_page() vDSO call Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-25 8:52 ` Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 9:32 ` Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 9:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-25 12:16 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-25 16:56 ` Nadav Amit
2021-02-25 17:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-25 17:53 ` Nadav Amit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=194EFB5E-46DE-4FEB-BCD5-3281B4C2A097@gmail.com \
--to=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox