[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170619113649.GB7233@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 12:36:50 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
arnd@...db.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, mark.rutland@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] drivers/char: kmem: disable read/write if
VMALLOC_START < PAGE_OFFSET
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 04:32:28PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> As it turns out, arm64 deviates from other architectures in the way it
> maps the VMALLOC region: on most (all?) other architectures, it resides
> strictly above the kernel's direct mapping of DRAM, but on arm64, this
> is the other way around. For instance, for a 48-bit VA configuration,
> we have
>
> modules : 0xffff000000000000 - 0xffff000008000000 ( 128 MB)
> vmalloc : 0xffff000008000000 - 0xffff7dffbfff0000 (129022 GB)
> ...
> vmemmap : 0xffff7e0000000000 - 0xffff800000000000 ( 2048 GB maximum)
> 0xffff7e0000000000 - 0xffff7e0003ff0000 ( 63 MB actual)
> memory : 0xffff800000000000 - 0xffff8000ffc00000 ( 4092 MB)
>
> This has mostly gone unnoticed until now, but it does appear that it
> breaks an assumption in the kcore read/write code, which does something
> like
>
> if (p < (unsigned long) high_memory) {
> ... use straight copy_[to|from]_user() using p as virtual address ...
> }
> ...
> if (count > 0) {
> ... use vread/vwrite for accesses past high_memory ...
> }
>
> The first condition will inadvertently hold for the VMALLOC region if
> VMALLOC_START < PAGE_OFFSET, but the read/write will subsequently fail
> the virt_addr_valid() check, resulting in a -ENXIO return value.
>
> Given how kmem seems to be living in borrowed time anyway, and given
> the fact that nobody noticed that the read/write interface is broken
> on arm64 in the first place, let's not bother trying to fix it, but
> simply fail such calls with a warning if VMALLOC_START < PAGE_OFFSET.
> (Note that kmem's mmap() interface is not affected by this)
>
> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
> ---
>
> This is just an RFC. There may be better ways to deal with this, including
> disabling /dev/kmem altogether on arm64.
FWIW: I'm fine with either approach.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists