[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] x86/mm: re-implement get_page_light() using an atomic increment
On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 08:54:34AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 01.03.2024 13:42, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > > The current usage of a cmpxchg loop to increase the value of page count is > > not > > optimal on amd64, as there's already an instruction to do an atomic add to a > > 64bit integer. > > > > Switch the code in get_page_light() to use an atomic increment, as that > > avoids > > a loop construct. This slightly changes the order of the checks, as current > > code will crash before modifying the page count_info if the conditions are > > not > > correct, while with the proposed change the crash will happen immediately > > after having carried the counter increase. Since we are crashing anyway, I > > don't believe the re-ordering to have any meaningful impact. > > While I consider this argument fine for ... > > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm.c > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm.c > > @@ -2580,16 +2580,10 @@ bool get_page(struct page_info *page, const struct > > domain *domain) > > */ > > static void get_page_light(struct page_info *page) > > { > > - unsigned long x, nx, y = page->count_info; > > + unsigned long old_pgc = arch_fetch_and_add(&page->count_info, 1); > > > > - do { > > - x = y; > > - nx = x + 1; > > - BUG_ON(!(x & PGC_count_mask)); /* Not allocated? */ > > ... this check, I'm afraid ... > > > - BUG_ON(!(nx & PGC_count_mask)); /* Overflow? */ > > ... this is a problem unless we discount the possibility of an overflow > happening in practice: If an overflow was detected only after the fact, > there would be a window in time where privilege escalation was still > possible from another CPU. IOW at the very least the description will > need extending further. Personally I wouldn't chance it and leave this > as a loop. So you are worried because this could potentially turn a DoS into an information leak during the brief period of time where the page counter has overflowed into the PGC state. My understating is the BUG_ON() was a mere protection against bad code that could mess with the counter, but that the counter overflowing is not a real issue during normal operation. Thanks, Roger.
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |