Re: [PATCH] riscv: fix race when vmap stack overflow

[Guo Ren]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 4:36 PM Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > +     atomic_set_release(&spin_shadow_stack, 0);
> > >
> > > Have not really looked the details: should there be a matching acquire?
> >
> > I use atomic_set_release here, because I need earlier memory
> > operations finished to make sure the sp is ready then set the spin
> > flag.
> >
> > The following memory operations order is not important, because we
> > just care about sp value.
> >
> > Also, we use relax amoswap before, because sp has naturelly
> > dependency. But giving them RCsc is okay here, because we don't care
> > about performance here.
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> I'm not really suggesting to add unneeded synchronization, even more
> so in local/private constructs as in this case.  It just felt odd to
> see the release without a pairing acquire, so I asked.  ;-)
Okay, let's keep:

 handle_kernel_stack_overflow:
+1:     la sp, spin_shadow_stack
+       amoswap.w sp, sp, (sp)
+       bnez sp, 1b
+
....
+     smp_store_release(&spin_shadow_stack, 0);

>
> Thanks,
>   Andrea
>
>
> > eg:
> >  handle_kernel_stack_overflow:
> > +1:     la sp, spin_shadow_stack
> > +       amoswap.w.aqrl sp, sp, (sp)
> > +       bnez sp, 1b
> > +
> > ....
> > +     smp_store_release(&spin_shadow_stack, 0);
> > +     smp_mb();



-- 
Best Regards
 Guo Ren