linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/9] x86, pkeys: add pkey set/get syscalls

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:13:05 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>
Cc:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] x86, pkeys: add pkey set/get syscalls


* Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net> wrote:

> On 07/11/2016 12:35 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> > mprotect_pkey()'s effects are per MM, but the system calls related to managing the 
> > keys (alloc/free/get/set) are fundamentally per CPU.
> > 
> > Here's an example of how this could matter to applications:
> > 
> >  - 'writer thread' gets a RW- key into index 1 to a specific data area
> >  - a pool of 'reader threads' may get the same pkey index 1 R-- to read the data 
> >    area.
> > 
> > Same page tables, same index, two protections and two purposes.
> > 
> > With a global, per MM allocation of keys we'd have to use two indices: index 1 and 2.
> 
> I'm not sure how this would work.  A piece of data mapped at only one virtual 
> address can have only one key associated with it.

Yeah, indeed, got myself confused there - but the actual protection bits are per 
CPU (per task).

> Remember, PKRU is just a *bitmap*.  The only place keys are stored is in the 
> page tables.

A pkey is an index *and* a protection mask. So by representing it as a bitmask we 
lose per thread information. This is what I meant by 'incomplete shadowing' - for 
example the debug code couldn't work: if we cleared a pkey in a task we wouldn't 
know what to restore it to with the current data structures, right?

Thanks,

	Ingo