From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B95C433F5 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:24:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40E0661248 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:24:19 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 40E0661248 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 70C266B0072; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 05:24:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 694856B0073; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 05:24:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 50E366B0074; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 05:24:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0076.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.76]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E53B6B0072 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 05:24:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin16.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E934A8104723 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:24:17 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78792635754.16.A312FCA Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by imf14.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ADD06001993 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:24:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1636539856; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1AM6xM7SxUCC79CInqY7ZFCL0tWuszI3QiZ+cxT6yto=; b=a5WzN6ThtW4CI3E9dGxMD0mLS1Ivnr6Y2aRuNM9CzSE9qWqcuWvEk7lzyXN0lG9DXDL2uU IhxcFMPPK796kg08icWHSRp4KBroq5d9uPeMe5Na0gz4Se66mUya8mGlEbvJ931Qnlppaw ydrfqpP01ag9lNXrmXDDVg0ufKVqz/E= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-532-d-_WqDGJOC2UpVWtF6Gltw-1; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 05:24:13 -0500 X-MC-Unique: d-_WqDGJOC2UpVWtF6Gltw-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id a2-20020a5d4d42000000b0017b3bcf41b9so308966wru.23 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 02:24:13 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:organization:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1AM6xM7SxUCC79CInqY7ZFCL0tWuszI3QiZ+cxT6yto=; b=euRRMTMPV1RTrevbfXG1/XjGx+HuiCeqLZyRuT7zlKsFEzF6Td9kyBrUdjywosi1Yy ZvLkus1s19XJFNjo3roDLw1Klkm9ESNkb3v06H1LRMUuGVyCA+V+zJMRnA5Wz/y2CEON 3iH4jz51b+axm2PmqUc+oyYmmywHRZuJVrMn7IebQjKm+5dNDcGT9w58reSI8iXQfS1a vcWn/dzCxubm4NLxOOgLuZAWLGgd7toZkNv3I/dFgDRMpoaIE5ysNPxWvy05RjsdyA7p BKeobbLoYaDfqOosIFH20U1jWRtZMezAZlOzZupRRynum680btiGjPDytjgUFWtU/giA wkKA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530K57V6H1GG4ntsneUtH9YbK1quVcM/h2OgdI0USGgGQPq1LUCO h6x42Ce6WlR/CQbHLRiY4mL47n/MJEqTiWbtTB8GBZVRJKGxy3WI0ndM+W5ZGDdrJEbQcrVq4Bk q+ztJLQkGH4Q= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6510:: with SMTP id x16mr18317969wru.2.1636539852597; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 02:24:12 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyX3A+4KVwXJvj7AxWl/jJg0VnnA5Opg1sFCSUSqSFzkdUXNL+FUnsAKgEfveOV4qc00zOx+g== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6510:: with SMTP id x16mr18317927wru.2.1636539852386; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 02:24:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.3.132] (p5b0c604f.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [91.12.96.79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p13sm5552185wmi.0.2021.11.10.02.24.11 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Nov 2021 02:24:11 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8032a24c-3800-16e5-41b7-5565e74d3863@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 11:24:10 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mm: Add PM_HUGE_THP_MAPPING to /proc/pid/pagemap To: Peter Xu Cc: Mina Almasry , Matthew Wilcox , "Paul E . McKenney" , Yu Zhao , Jonathan Corbet , Andrew Morton , Ivan Teterevkov , Florian Schmidt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org References: <20211107235754.1395488-1-almasrymina@google.com> <793685d2-be3f-9a74-c9a3-65c486e0ef1f@redhat.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5ADD06001993 X-Stat-Signature: f1kzuty6j3ars7o7a4mq46hi9qi4ktar Authentication-Results: imf14.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=a5WzN6Th; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=none (imf14.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com has no SPF policy when checking 170.10.133.124) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com X-HE-Tag: 1636539858-781216 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 10.11.21 09:57, Peter Xu wrote: > On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 09:30:50AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 10.11.21 09:27, Peter Xu wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 09:14:42AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>> On 10.11.21 08:03, Peter Xu wrote: >>>>> Hi, Mina, >>>>> >>>>> Sorry to comment late. >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 03:57:54PM -0800, Mina Almasry wrote: >>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/pagemap.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/pagemap.rst >>>>>> index fdc19fbc10839..8a0f0064ff336 100644 >>>>>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/pagemap.rst >>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/pagemap.rst >>>>>> @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ There are four components to pagemap: >>>>>> * Bit 56 page exclusively mapped (since 4.2) >>>>>> * Bit 57 pte is uffd-wp write-protected (since 5.13) (see >>>>>> :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/mm/userfaultfd.rst `) >>>>>> - * Bits 57-60 zero >>>>>> + * Bit 58 page is a huge (PMD size) THP mapping >>>>>> + * Bits 59-60 zero >>>>>> * Bit 61 page is file-page or shared-anon (since 3.5) >>>>>> * Bit 62 page swapped >>>>>> * Bit 63 page present >>>>>> diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c >>>>>> index ad667dbc96f5c..6f1403f83b310 100644 >>>>>> --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c >>>>>> +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c >>>>>> @@ -1302,6 +1302,7 @@ struct pagemapread { >>>>>> #define PM_SOFT_DIRTY BIT_ULL(55) >>>>>> #define PM_MMAP_EXCLUSIVE BIT_ULL(56) >>>>>> #define PM_UFFD_WP BIT_ULL(57) >>>>>> +#define PM_HUGE_THP_MAPPING BIT_ULL(58) >>>>> >>>>> The ending "_MAPPING" seems redundant to me, how about just call it "PM_THP" or >>>>> "PM_HUGE" (as THP also means HUGE already)? >>>>> >>>>> IMHO the core problem is about permission controls, and it seems to me we're >>>>> actually trying to workaround it by duplicating some information we have.. so >>>>> it's kind of a pity. Totally not against this patch, but imho it'll be nicer >>>>> if it's the permission part that to be enhanced, rather than a new but slightly >>>>> duplicated interface. >>>> >>>> It's not a permission problem AFAIKS: even with permissions "changed", >>>> any attempt to use /proc/kpageflags is just racy. Let's not go down that >>>> path, it's really the wrong mechanism to export to random userspace. >>> >>> I agree it's racy, but IMHO that's fine. These are hints for userspace to make >>> decisions, they cannot be always right. Even if we fetch atomically and seeing >>> that this pte is swapped out, it can be quickly accessed at the same time and >>> it'll be in-memory again. Only if we can freeze the whole pgtable but we >>> can't, so they can only be used as hints. >> >> Sorry, I don't think /proc/kpageflags (or exporting the PFNs to random >> users via /proc/self/pagemap) is the way to go. >> >> "Since Linux 4.0 only users with the CAP_SYS_ADMIN capability can get >> PFNs. In 4.0 and 4.1 opens by unprivileged fail with -EPERM. Starting >> from 4.2 the PFN field is zeroed if the user does not have >> CAP_SYS_ADMIN. Reason: information about PFNs helps in exploiting >> Rowhammer vulnerability." > > IMHO these are two problems that you mentioned. That's also what I was > wondering about: could the app be granted with CAP_SYS_ADMIN then? > > I am not sure whether that'll work well with /proc/kpage* though, as it's by > default 0400. So perhaps we need to manual adjust the file permission too to > make sure the app can both access PFNs (with SYS_ADMIN) and the flags. Totally > no expert on the permissions.. Me too :) IIRC changing permissions that was not an option -- which is why the first approach suggested a new /proc/self/pageflags. But I guess Mina can remind us (and eventually document all that in the patch description :) ). -- Thanks, David / dhildenb