linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Linus Torvalds' <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"Kostya Serebryany" <kcc@google.com>,
	Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com>,
	"Andrey Konovalov" <andreyknvl@gmail.com>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Taras Madan <tarasmadan@google.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	"H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	"Rick Edgecombe" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
	Bharata B Rao <bharata@amd.com>,
	Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCHv13 05/16] x86/uaccess: Provide untagged_addr() and remove tags before address check
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2023 13:55:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4cf29f7a1a0041da818ac7ef598d142e@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wgmGqwDD0kvjZxekU6uYR2x6+QgRHeMKy3snL2XYEzwEw@mail.gmail.com>

From: Linus Torvalds
> Sent: 31 December 2022 00:42
> 
...
> And on 64-bit, we really only need to check the high bit.
> 
> In fact, we don't even want to *check* it, because then we need to do
> that disgusting array_index_mask_nospec thing to mask the bits for it,
> so it would be even better to use purely arithmetic with no
> conditionals anywhere.
> 
> And that's exactly what we could do on x86-64:
> 
>         movq %rdx,%rax
>         shrq $63,%rax
>         orq %rax,%rdx
> 
> would actually be noticeably better than what we do now for for
> TASK_SIZE checking _and_ for the array index masking (for putuser.S,
> we'd use %rbx instead of %rax in that sequence).
...
> It would just turn all kernel addresses into all ones, which is then
> guaranteed to fault. So no need for any conditional that never
> triggers in real life anyway.

Are byte loads guaranteed to fault?
I suspect the 'all ones' address can be assigned to io.
So get/put_user for a byte probably needs a 'js' test after the 'orq'.
(I don't think you need to worry about a apeculative load from an
uncached address.)

...
> And once we don't test against TASK_SIZE, the need for UNTAG_ADDR just
> goes away, so now LAM is better too.
> 
> In other words, we could actually improve on our current code _and_
> simplify the LAM situation. Win-win.

Presumably the fault handler already has the code to untag addresses.

It has to be said that I don't really see why tagging addresses is a
significant benefit unless the hardware checks than the PTE/TLB is
also set with the correct tag.
All it seems to me that it does it make more 'random addresses' valid.

Clearly interpreters can set and check the high address bits, but they
can also mask them after the checks (or use xor to flip the bits and
let the cpu fault on errors).

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-02 13:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-27  3:08 [PATCHv13 00/16] Linear Address Masking enabling Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 01/16] x86: Allow atomic MM_CONTEXT flags setting Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-01-04 19:07   ` Dave Hansen
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 02/16] x86: CPUID and CR3/CR4 flags for Linear Address Masking Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 03/16] x86/mm: Handle LAM on context switch Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 04/16] mm: Introduce untagged_addr_remote() Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 05/16] x86/uaccess: Provide untagged_addr() and remove tags before address check Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27 19:10   ` Linus Torvalds
2022-12-31  0:10     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-31  0:42       ` Linus Torvalds
2023-01-02 13:55         ` David Laight [this message]
2023-01-02 19:05           ` Linus Torvalds
2023-01-03  8:37             ` David Laight
2023-01-07  9:10         ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-01-07 17:28           ` Linus Torvalds
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 06/16] x86/mm: Provide arch_prctl() interface for LAM Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-01-04 19:55   ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2023-01-10  6:17     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 07/16] x86/mm: Reduce untagged_addr() overhead until the first LAM user Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 08/16] mm: Expose untagging mask in /proc/$PID/status Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 09/16] iommu/sva: Replace pasid_valid() helper with mm_valid_pasid() Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 10/16] x86/mm/iommu/sva: Make LAM and SVA mutually exclusive Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 11/16] selftests/x86/lam: Add malloc and tag-bits test cases for linear-address masking Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 12/16] selftests/x86/lam: Add mmap and SYSCALL " Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 13/16] selftests/x86/lam: Add io_uring " Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 14/16] selftests/x86/lam: Add inherit " Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 15/16] selftests/x86/lam: Add ARCH_FORCE_TAGGED_SVA " Kirill A. Shutemov
2022-12-27  3:08 ` [PATCHv13 16/16] selftests/x86/lam: Add test cases for LAM vs thread creation Kirill A. Shutemov

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=4cf29f7a1a0041da818ac7ef598d142e@AcuMS.aculab.com \
    --to=david.laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=andreyknvl@gmail.com \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=bharata@amd.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kcc@google.com \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com \
    --cc=tarasmadan@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --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