[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8675c11631ac027a78e00d4fe2c20736496b1e97.camel@russell.cc>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2020 11:46:37 +1100
From: Russell Currey <ruscur@...sell.cc>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Cc: joel@....id.au, mpe@...erman.id.au, ajd@...ux.ibm.com, dja@...ens.net,
npiggin@...il.com, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] powerpc/mm: Implement set_memory() routines
On Wed, 2020-01-08 at 13:52 +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
> Le 24/12/2019 à 06:55, Russell Currey a écrit :
> > The set_memory_{ro/rw/nx/x}() functions are required for
> > STRICT_MODULE_RWX,
> > and are generally useful primitives to have. This implementation
> > is
> > designed to be completely generic across powerpc's many MMUs.
> >
> > It's possible that this could be optimised to be faster for
> > specific
> > MMUs, but the focus is on having a generic and safe implementation
> > for
> > now.
> >
> > This implementation does not handle cases where the caller is
> > attempting
> > to change the mapping of the page it is executing from, or if
> > another
> > CPU is concurrently using the page being altered. These cases
> > likely
> > shouldn't happen, but a more complex implementation with MMU-
> > specific code
> > could safely handle them, so that is left as a TODO for now.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Russell Currey <ruscur@...sell.cc>
> > ---
> > arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 1 +
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/set_memory.h | 32 +++++++++++
> > arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile | 1 +
> > arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c | 83
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 4 files changed, 117 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/include/asm/set_memory.h
> > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> > index 1ec34e16ed65..f0b9b47b5353 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
> > @@ -133,6 +133,7 @@ config PPC
> > select ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL
> > select ARCH_HAS_MEMBARRIER_CALLBACKS
> > select ARCH_HAS_SCALED_CPUTIME if
> > VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_NATIVE && PPC_BOOK3S_64
> > + select ARCH_HAS_SET_MEMORY
> > select ARCH_HAS_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX if ((PPC_BOOK3S_64 ||
> > PPC32) && !RELOCATABLE && !HIBERNATION)
> > select ARCH_HAS_TICK_BROADCAST if
> > GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST
> > select ARCH_HAS_UACCESS_FLUSHCACHE
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/set_memory.h
> > b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/set_memory.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..5230ddb2fefd
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/set_memory.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > +#ifndef _ASM_POWERPC_SET_MEMORY_H
> > +#define _ASM_POWERPC_SET_MEMORY_H
> > +
> > +#define SET_MEMORY_RO 1
> > +#define SET_MEMORY_RW 2
> > +#define SET_MEMORY_NX 3
> > +#define SET_MEMORY_X 4
>
> Maybe going from 0 to 3 would be better than 1 to 4
>
> > +
> > +int change_memory_attr(unsigned long addr, int numpages, int
> > action);
>
> action could be unsigned.
>
> > +
> > +static inline int set_memory_ro(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
> > +{
> > + return change_memory_attr(addr, numpages, SET_MEMORY_RO);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline int set_memory_rw(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
> > +{
> > + return change_memory_attr(addr, numpages, SET_MEMORY_RW);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline int set_memory_nx(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
> > +{
> > + return change_memory_attr(addr, numpages, SET_MEMORY_NX);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline int set_memory_x(unsigned long addr, int numpages)
> > +{
> > + return change_memory_attr(addr, numpages, SET_MEMORY_X);
> > +}
> > +
> > +#endif
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile
> > index 5e147986400d..d0a0bcbc9289 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile
> > @@ -20,3 +20,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_HIGHMEM) += highmem.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_COPRO_BASE) += copro_fault.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_PTDUMP) += ptdump/
> > obj-$(CONFIG_KASAN) += kasan/
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SET_MEMORY) += pageattr.o
>
> CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SET_MEMORY is set inconditionnally, I think you
> should
> add pageattr.o to obj-y instead. CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_XXX are almost
> never
> used in Makefiles
Fair enough, will keep that in mind
>
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c
> > b/arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..15d5fb04f531
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * MMU-generic set_memory implementation for powerpc
> > + *
> > + * Copyright 2019, IBM Corporation.
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/mm.h>
> > +#include <linux/set_memory.h>
> > +
> > +#include <asm/mmu.h>
> > +#include <asm/page.h>
> > +#include <asm/pgtable.h>
> > +
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Updates the attributes of a page in three steps:
> > + *
> > + * 1. invalidate the page table entry
> > + * 2. flush the TLB
> > + * 3. install the new entry with the updated attributes
> > + *
> > + * This is unsafe if the caller is attempting to change the
> > mapping of the
> > + * page it is executing from, or if another CPU is concurrently
> > using the
> > + * page being altered.
> > + *
> > + * TODO make the implementation resistant to this.
> > + */
> > +static int __change_page_attr(pte_t *ptep, unsigned long addr,
> > void *data)
> > +{
> > + int action = *((int *)data);
>
> Don't use pointers for so simple things, pointers forces the compiler
> to
> setup a stack frame and save the data into stack. Instead do:
>
> int action = (int)data;
>
> > + pte_t pte_val;
> > +
> > + // invalidate the PTE so it's safe to modify
> > + pte_val = ptep_get_and_clear(&init_mm, addr, ptep);
> > + flush_tlb_kernel_range(addr, addr + PAGE_SIZE);
>
> Why flush a range for a single page ? On most targets this will do a
> tlbia which is heavy, while a tlbie would suffice.
>
> I think flush_tlb_kernel_range() should be replaced by something
> flushing only a single page.
You might be able to help me out here, I wanted to do that but the only
functions I could find that flushed single pages needed a
vm_area_struct, which I can't get.
>
> > +
> > + // modify the PTE bits as desired, then apply
> > + switch (action) {
> > + case SET_MEMORY_RO:
> > + pte_val = pte_wrprotect(pte_val);
> > + break;
> > + case SET_MEMORY_RW:
> > + pte_val = pte_mkwrite(pte_val);
> > + break;
> > + case SET_MEMORY_NX:
> > + pte_val = pte_exprotect(pte_val);
> > + break;
> > + case SET_MEMORY_X:
> > + pte_val = pte_mkexec(pte_val);
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + WARN_ON(true);
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> Is it worth checking that the action is valid for each page ? I
> think
> validity of action should be checked in change_memory_attr(). All
> other
> functions are static so you know they won't be called from outside.
>
> Once done, you can squash __change_page_attr() into
> change_page_attr(),
> remove the ret var and return 0 all the time.
Makes sense to fold things into a single function, but in terms of
performance it shouldn't make a difference, right? I still have to
check the action to determine what to change (unless I replace passing
SET_MEMORY_RO into apply_to_page_range() with a function pointer to
pte_wrprotect() for example).
>
> > + }
> > +
> > + set_pte_at(&init_mm, addr, ptep, pte_val);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int change_page_attr(pte_t *ptep, unsigned long addr, void
> > *data)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + spin_lock(&init_mm.page_table_lock);
> > + ret = __change_page_attr(ptep, addr, data);
> > + spin_unlock(&init_mm.page_table_lock);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int change_memory_attr(unsigned long addr, int numpages, int
> > action)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long start = ALIGN_DOWN(addr, PAGE_SIZE);
> > + unsigned long size = numpages * PAGE_SIZE;
> > +
> > + if (!numpages)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + return apply_to_page_range(&init_mm, start, size,
> > change_page_attr, &action);
>
> Use (void*)action instead of &action (see upper comment)
To get this to work I had to use (void *)(size_t)action to stop the
compiler from complaining about casting an int to a void*, is there a
better way to go about it? Works fine, just looks gross.
>
> > +}
> >
>
> Christophe
>
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.
