From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>,
Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: PAE entries must have their low word cleared first
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:06:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <946b367619cfd3dcd3ba547e216e494b@cl.cam.ac.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0604261538260.9915@blonde.wat.veritas.com>
On 26 Apr 2006, at 15:46, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> If that's so (I don't trust my judgement on matters of speculative
> execution), then I think you'd do better to replace the *ptep =
> __pte(0)
> by pte_clear(mm, addr, ptep), and so avoid your ugly #ifdef'ing: please
> check, but I think you'll find that reduces to just the barrier you
> want.
> CC'ed Zach since it's his optimization, and he'll judge that
> spexecution.
In more detail the problem is that, since we're still running on the
page tables while clearing them, the CPU may choose to prefetch a
half-cleared pte into its TLB, and then execute speculative memory
accesses based on that mapping (including ones that may write-allocate
cachelines, leading to problems like the AMD AGP GART deadlock Linux
had a year or so back).
The barrier is needed to ensure that the bottom half is cleared before
the top half. In fact it probably ought to be wmb() -- that's clearer
in intent and actually reduces to barrier() on all PAE-capable
platforms.
We cannot use pte_clear() unless we redefine it for PAE. Currently it
reduces to set_pte() which explicitly uses the wrong ordering (sets
high *then* low, because it's normally used to introduce a mapping).
Also, I think wmb() should be used in PAE's set_pte(), rather than the
current smp_wmb(). They reduce to the same thing, but wmb() makes it
clear this is is not an issue specific to SMP systems.
-- Keir
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-26 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-26 13:46 Jan Beulich
2006-04-26 14:46 ` Hugh Dickins
2006-04-26 15:06 ` Keir Fraser [this message]
2006-04-26 15:44 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-04-26 15:57 ` Hugh Dickins
2006-04-26 16:12 ` Keir Fraser
2006-04-26 15:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2006-04-26 16:06 ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-26 15:58 ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27 10:27 ` Sonny Rao
2006-04-27 13:39 ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-26 22:11 Brunner, Richard
2006-04-26 22:22 ` Zachary Amsden
2006-04-26 22:27 ` Zachary Amsden
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=946b367619cfd3dcd3ba547e216e494b@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--to=keir.fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zach@vmware.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®