On 11/10/2017 02:03 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> +static inline u16 kern_asid(u16 asid)
>> +{
>> +       VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(asid > MAX_ASID_AVAILABLE);
>> +       /*
>> +        * If PCID is on, ASID-aware code paths put the ASID+1 into the PCID
>> +        * bits.  This serves two purposes.  It prevents a nasty situation in
>> +        * which PCID-unaware code saves CR3, loads some other value (with 
>> PCID
>> +        * == 0), and then restores CR3, thus corrupting the TLB for ASID 0 
>> if
>> +        * the saved ASID was nonzero.  It also means that any bugs involving
>> +        * loading a PCID-enabled CR3 with CR4.PCIDE off will trigger
>> +        * deterministically.
>> +        */
>> +       return asid + 1;
>> +}
> This seems really error-prone.  Maybe we should have a pcid_t type and
> make all the interfaces that want a h/w PCID take pcid_t.

Yeah, totally agree.  I actually had a nasty bug or two around this area
because of this.

I divided them among hw_asid_t and sw_asid_t.  You can turn a sw_asid_t
into a kernel hw_asid_t or a user hw_asid_t.  But, it cause too much
churn across the TLB flushing code so I shelved it for now.

I'd love to come back nd fix this up properly though.

Reply via email to