Re: [PATCH 10/26] x86, pkeys: notify userspace about protection key faults

[Dave Hansen]

On 09/25/2015 12:11 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> > > Btw., how does pkey support interact with hugepages?
>> > 
>> > Surprisingly little.  I've made sure that everything works with huge pages and 
>> > that the (huge) PTEs and VMAs get set up correctly, but I'm not sure I had to 
>> > touch the huge page code at all.  I have test code to ensure that it works the 
>> > same as with small pages, but everything worked pretty naturally.
> Yeah, so the reason I'm asking about expectations is that this code:
> 
> +       follow_ret = follow_pte(tsk->mm, address, &ptep, &ptl);
> +       if (!follow_ret) {
> +               /*
> +                * On a successful follow, make sure to
> +                * drop the lock.
> +                */
> +               pte = *ptep;
> +               pte_unmap_unlock(ptep, ptl);
> +               ret = pte_pkey(pte);
> 
> is visibly hugepage-unsafe: if a vma is hugepage mapped, there are no ptes, only 
> pmds - and the protection key index lives in the pmd. We don't seem to recover 
> that information properly.

You got me on this one.  I assumed that follow_pte() handled huge pages.
 It does not.

But, the code still worked.  Since follow_pte() fails for all huge
pages, it just falls back to pulling the protection key out of the VMA,
which _does_ work for huge pages.

I've actually removed the PTE walking and I just now use the VMA
directly.  I don't see a ton of additional value from walking the page
tables when we can get what we need from the VMA.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/