Skip to content

L
linux
Switch branch/tag
  1. 17 Feb, 2012 1 commit
    • Linus Torvalds's avatar
      i387: move AMD K7/K8 fpu fxsave/fxrstor workaround from save to restore · 4903062b
      Linus Torvalds authored 
      The AMD K7/K8 CPUs don't save/restore FDP/FIP/FOP unless an exception is
pending.  In order to not leak FIP state from one process to another, we
need to do a floating point load after the fxsave of the old process,
and before the fxrstor of the new FPU state.  That resets the state to
the (uninteresting) kernel load, rather than some potentially sensitive
user information.

We used to do this directly after the FPU state save, but that is
actually very inconvenient, since it

 (a) corrupts what is potentially perfectly good FPU state that we might
     want to lazy avoid restoring later and

 (b) on x86-64 it resulted in a very annoying ordering constraint, where
     "__unlazy_fpu()" in the task switch needs to be delayed until after
     the DS segment has been reloaded just to get the new DS value.

Coupling it to the fxrstor instead of the fxsave automatically avoids
both of these issues, and also ensures that we only do it when actually
necessary (the FP state after a save may never actually get used).  It's
simply a much more natural place for the leaked state cleanup.
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      4903062b
  3. 16 Feb, 2012 4 commits
    • Linus Torvalds's avatar
      i387: do not preload FPU state at task switch time · b3b0870e
      Linus Torvalds authored 
      Yes, taking the trap to re-load the FPU/MMX state is expensive, but so
is spending several days looking for a bug in the state save/restore
code.  And the preload code has some rather subtle interactions with
both paravirtualization support and segment state restore, so it's not
nearly as simple as it should be.

Also, now that we no longer necessarily depend on a single bit (ie
TS_USEDFPU) for keeping track of the state of the FPU, we migth be able
to do better.  If we are really switching between two processes that
keep touching the FP state, save/restore is inevitable, but in the case
of having one process that does most of the FPU usage, we may actually
be able to do much better than the preloading.

In particular, we may be able to keep track of which CPU the process ran
on last, and also per CPU keep track of which process' FP state that CPU
has.  For modern CPU's that don't destroy the FPU contents on save time,
that would allow us to do a lazy restore by just re-enabling the
existing FPU state - with no restore cost at all!
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      b3b0870e
    • Linus Torvalds's avatar
      i387: don't ever touch TS_USEDFPU directly, use helper functions · 6d59d7a9
      Linus Torvalds authored 
      This creates three helper functions that do the TS_USEDFPU accesses, and
makes everybody that used to do it by hand use those helpers instead.

In addition, there's a couple of helper functions for the "change both
CR0.TS and TS_USEDFPU at the same time" case, and the places that do
that together have been changed to use those.  That means that we have
fewer random places that open-code this situation.

The intent is partly to clarify the code without actually changing any
semantics yet (since we clearly still have some hard to reproduce bug in
this area), but also to make it much easier to use another approach
entirely to caching the CR0.TS bit for software accesses.

Right now we use a bit in the thread-info 'status' variable (this patch
does not change that), but we might want to make it a full field of its
own or even make it a per-cpu variable.
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      6d59d7a9
    • Linus Torvalds's avatar
      i387: move TS_USEDFPU clearing out of __save_init_fpu and into callers · b6c66418
      Linus Torvalds authored 
      Touching TS_USEDFPU without touching CR0.TS is confusing, so don't do
it.  By moving it into the callers, we always do the TS_USEDFPU next to
the CR0.TS accesses in the source code, and it's much easier to see how
the two go hand in hand.
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      b6c66418
    • Linus Torvalds's avatar
      i387: fix x86-64 preemption-unsafe user stack save/restore · 15d8791c
      Linus Torvalds authored 
      Commit 5b1cbac3 ("i387: make irq_fpu_usable() tests more robust")
added a sanity check to the #NM handler to verify that we never cause
the "Device Not Available" exception in kernel mode.

However, that check actually pinpointed a (fundamental) race where we do
cause that exception as part of the signal stack FPU state save/restore
code.

Because we use the floating point instructions themselves to save and
restore state directly from user mode, we cannot do that atomically with
testing the TS_USEDFPU bit: the user mode access itself may cause a page
fault, which causes a task switch, which saves and restores the FP/MMX
state from the kernel buffers.

This kind of "recursive" FP state save is fine per se, but it means that
when the signal stack save/restore gets restarted, it will now take the
'#NM' exception we originally tried to avoid.  With preemption this can
happen even without the page fault - but because of the user access, we
cannot just disable preemption around the save/restore instruction.

There are various ways to solve this, including using the
"enable/disable_page_fault()" helpers to not allow page faults at all
during the sequence, and fall back to copying things by hand without the
use of the native FP state save/restore instructions.

However, the simplest thing to do is to just allow the #NM from kernel
space, but fix the race in setting and clearing CR0.TS that this all
exposed: the TS bit changes and the TS_USEDFPU bit absolutely have to be
atomic wrt scheduling, so while the actual state save/restore can be
interrupted and restarted, the act of actually clearing/setting CR0.TS
and the TS_USEDFPU bit together must not.

Instead of just adding random "preempt_disable/enable()" calls to what
is already excessively ugly code, this introduces some helper functions
that mostly mirror the "kernel_fpu_begin/end()" functionality, just for
the user state instead.

Those helper functions should probably eventually replace the other
ad-hoc CR0.TS and TS_USEDFPU tests too, but I'll need to think about it
some more: the task switching functionality in particular needs to
expose the difference between the 'prev' and 'next' threads, while the
new helper functions intentionally were written to only work with
'current'.
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      15d8791c
  5. 15 Feb, 2012 1 commit
    • Linus Torvalds's avatar
      i387: fix sense of sanity check · c38e2345
      Linus Torvalds authored 
      The check for save_init_fpu() (introduced in commit 5b1cbac3: "i387:
make irq_fpu_usable() tests more robust") was the wrong way around, but
I hadn't noticed, because my "tests" were bogus: the FPU exceptions are
disabled by default, so even doing a divide by zero never actually
triggers this code at all unless you do extra work to enable them.

So if anybody did enable them, they'd get one spurious warning.
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      c38e2345
  7. 14 Feb, 2012 34 commits
GitLab Nexedi Edition | About GitLab | About Nexedi | 沪ICP备2021021310号-2 | 沪ICP备2021021310号-7