[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <555dc453-3028-199a-881a-3ddeb41e4d6d@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 17:13:00 +0300
From: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...wei.com>
To: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Tagging of vmalloc pages for supporting the pmalloc
allocator
On 07/08/17 16:31, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 02:26:21PM +0300, Igor Stoppa wrote:
[...]
>> I'll add a vm_area field as you advised.
>>
>> Is this something I could send as standalone patch?
>
> Note that vmalloc() is not the only thing that use vmalloc address
> space. There is also vmap() and i know one set of drivers that use
> vmap() and also use the mapping field of struct page namely GPU
> drivers.
Ah, yes, you mentioned this.
> So like i said previously i would store a flag inside vm_struct to
> know if page you are looking at are pmalloc or not.
And I was planning to follow your advice, using one of the flags.
But ...
> Again do you
> need to store something per page ? Would storing it per vm_struct
> not be enough ?
... there was this further comment, about speeding up the access to
vm_area, which seemed good from performance perspective.
---8<--------------8<--------------8<--------------8<--------------8<---
On 03/08/17 14:48, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 03-08-17 13:11:45, Igor Stoppa wrote:
[...]
>> But, to reply more specifically to your advice, yes, I think I could
>> add a flag to vm_struct and then retrieve its value, for the address
>> being processed, by passing through find_vm_area().
>
> ... and you can store vm_struct pointer to the struct page there and
> you won't need to do the slow find_vm_area. I haven't checked very
> closely but this should be possible in principle. I guess other
> callers might benefit from this as well.
---8<--------------8<--------------8<--------------8<--------------8<---
I do not strictly need to modify the page struct, but it seems it might
harm performance, if it is added on the path of hardened usercopy.
I have an updated version of the old proposal:
* put a magic number in the private field, during initialization of
pmalloc pages
* during hardened usercopy verification, when I have to assess if a page
is of pmalloc type, compare the private field against the magic number
* if and only if the private field matches the magic number, then invoke
find_vm_area(), so that the slowness affects only a possibly limited
amount of false positives.
--
igor
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
