lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 0/6] Static calls
Date
> On Jan 11, 2019, at 1:41 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 09:36:59PM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>> On Jan 11, 2019, at 1:22 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 12:46:39PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 12:31 PM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>> I was referring to the fact that a single static call key update will
>>>>> usually result in patching multiple call sites. But you're right, it's
>>>>> only 1-2 trampolines per text_poke_bp() invocation. Though eventually
>>>>> we may want to batch all the writes like what Daniel has proposed for
>>>>> jump labels, to reduce IPIs.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, my suggestion doesn't allow for batching, since it would
>>>> basically generate one trampoline for every rewritten instruction.
>>>
>>> As Andy said, I think batching would still be possible, it's just that
>>> we'd have to create multiple trampolines at a time.
>>>
>>> Or... we could do a hybrid approach: create a single custom trampoline
>>> which has the call destination patched in, but put the return address in
>>> %rax -- which is always clobbered, even for callee-saved PV ops. Like:
>>>
>>> trampoline:
>>> push %rax
>>> call patched-dest
>>>
>>> That way the batching could be done with a single trampoline
>>> (particularly if using rcu-sched to avoid the sti hack).
>>
>> I don’t see RCU-sched solves the problem if you don’t disable preemption. On
>> a fully preemptable kernel, you can get preempted between the push and the
>> call (jmp) or before the push. RCU-sched can then finish, and the preempted
>> task may later jump to a wrong patched-dest.
>
> Argh, I misspoke about RCU-sched. Words are hard.
>
> I meant synchronize_rcu_tasks(), which is a completely different animal.
> My understanding is that it waits until all runnable tasks (including
> preempted tasks) have gotten a chance to run.

Actually, I just used the term you used, and thought about
synchronize_sched(). If you look at my patch [1], you’ll see I did something
similar using synchronize_sched(). But this required some delicate work of
restarting any preempted “optpoline” (or whatever name you want) block.

[Note that my implementation has a terrible bug in this respect].

This is required since running a preempted task to does now prevent it from
being preempted again without doing any “real” progress.

If we want to adapt the same solution to static_calls, this means that in
retint_kernel (entry_64.S), you need check whether you got preempted inside
the trampoline and change the saved RIP in such case back, before the
static_call.

IMHO, sti+jmp is simpler.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181231072112.21051-6-namit@vmware.com/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-11 22:57    [W:0.102 / U:2.916 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site