diff mbox series

[v3,3/4] membarrier: Explicitly sync remote cores when SYNC_CORE is requested

Message ID 776b448d5f7bd6b12690707f5ed67bcda7f1d427.1607058304.git.luto@kernel.org
State Accepted
Commit 758c9373d84168dc7d039cf85a0e920046b17b41
Headers show
Series [v3,1/4] x86/membarrier: Get rid of a dubious optimization | expand

Commit Message

Andy Lutomirski Dec. 4, 2020, 5:07 a.m. UTC 
membarrier() does not explicitly sync_core() remote CPUs; instead, it
relies on the assumption that an IPI will result in a core sync.  On
x86, I think this may be true in practice, but it's not architecturally
reliable.  In particular, the SDM and APM do not appear to guarantee
that interrupt delivery is serializing.  While IRET does serialize, IPI
return can schedule, thereby switching to another task in the same mm
that was sleeping in a syscall.  The new task could then SYSRET back to
usermode without ever executing IRET.

Make this more robust by explicitly calling sync_core_before_usermode()
on remote cores.  (This also helps people who search the kernel tree for
instances of sync_core() and sync_core_before_usermode() -- one might be
surprised that the core membarrier code doesn't currently show up in a
such a search.)

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/sched/membarrier.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

Comments

Andy Lutomirski Dec. 9, 2020, 4:13 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 9:07 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
>

> membarrier() does not explicitly sync_core() remote CPUs; instead, it

> relies on the assumption that an IPI will result in a core sync.  On

> x86, I think this may be true in practice, but it's not architecturally

> reliable.  In particular, the SDM and APM do not appear to guarantee

> that interrupt delivery is serializing.  While IRET does serialize, IPI

> return can schedule, thereby switching to another task in the same mm

> that was sleeping in a syscall.  The new task could then SYSRET back to

> usermode without ever executing IRET.

>

> Make this more robust by explicitly calling sync_core_before_usermode()

> on remote cores.  (This also helps people who search the kernel tree for

> instances of sync_core() and sync_core_before_usermode() -- one might be

> surprised that the core membarrier code doesn't currently show up in a

> such a search.)

>


Fixes: 70216e18e519 ("membarrier: Provide core serializing command,
*_SYNC_CORE")

> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org

> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>

> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/kernel/sched/membarrier.c b/kernel/sched/membarrier.c
index 6251d3d12abe..01538b31f27e 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/membarrier.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/membarrier.c
@@ -166,6 +166,23 @@  static void ipi_mb(void *info)
 	smp_mb();	/* IPIs should be serializing but paranoid. */
 }
 
+static void ipi_sync_core(void *info)
+{
+	/*
+	 * The smp_mb() in membarrier after all the IPIs is supposed to
+	 * ensure that memory on remote CPUs that occur before the IPI
+	 * become visible to membarrier()'s caller -- see scenario B in
+	 * the big comment at the top of this file.
+	 *
+	 * A sync_core() would provide this guarantee, but
+	 * sync_core_before_usermode() might end up being deferred until
+	 * after membarrier()'s smp_mb().
+	 */
+	smp_mb();	/* IPIs should be serializing but paranoid. */
+
+	sync_core_before_usermode();
+}
+
 static void ipi_rseq(void *info)
 {
 	/*
@@ -301,6 +318,7 @@  static int membarrier_private_expedited(int flags, int cpu_id)
 		if (!(atomic_read(&mm->membarrier_state) &
 		      MEMBARRIER_STATE_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED_SYNC_CORE_READY))
 			return -EPERM;
+		ipi_func = ipi_sync_core;
 	} else if (flags == MEMBARRIER_FLAG_RSEQ) {
 		if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RSEQ))
 			return -EINVAL;