Re: [RFC PATCH v2 11/27] x86/mm: Modify ptep_set_wrprotect and pmdp_set_wrprotect for _PAGE_DIRTY_SW

[Nadav Amit]

at 6:44 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 07/10/2018 03:26 PM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
>> +	/*
>> +	 * On platforms before CET, other threads could race to
>> +	 * create a RO and _PAGE_DIRTY_HW PMD again.  However,
>> +	 * on CET platforms, this is safe without a TLB flush.
>> +	 */
> 
> If I didn't work for Intel, I'd wonder what the heck CET is and what the
> heck it has to do with _PAGE_DIRTY_HW.  I think we need a better comment
> than this.  How about:
> 
> 	Some processors can _start_ a write, but end up seeing
> 	a read-only PTE by the time they get to getting the
> 	Dirty bit.  In this case, they will set the Dirty bit,
> 	leaving a read-only, Dirty PTE which looks like a Shadow
> 	Stack PTE.
> 
> 	However, this behavior has been improved and will *not* occur on
> 	processors supporting Shadow Stacks.  Without this guarantee, a
> 	transition to a non-present PTE and flush the TLB would be
> 	needed.

Interesting. Does that regard the knights landing bug or something more
general?

Will the write succeed or trigger a page-fault in this case?

[ I know it is not related to the patch, but I would appreciate if you share
your knowledge ]

Regards,
Nadav