[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170823150351.606ba09f@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 15:03:51 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>,
Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>,
Phil Elwell <phil@...pberrypi.org>,
linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Matthias Reichl <hias@...us.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Arm: mm: ftrace: Only set text back to ro after kernel
has been marked ro
On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 11:48:13 -0700
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/init.c b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> > index ad80548..fd75f38 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> > @@ -745,19 +745,29 @@ static int __mark_rodata_ro(void *unused)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int kernel_set_to_readonly;
>
> Adding a comment here might be a good idea, something like:
>
> /* Has system boot-up reached mark_rodata_ro() yet? */
I don't mind adding a comment, but the above is rather self explanatory
(one can easily see that it is set in mark_rodata_ro() with a simple
search).
If a comment is to be added, something a bit more descriptive of the
functionality of the variable would be appropriate:
/*
* Ignore modifying kernel text permissions until the kernel core calls
* make_rodata_ro() at system start up.
*/
I can resend with the comment, or whoever takes this could add it
themselves.
-- Steve
>
> Otherwise:
>
> Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>
> > +
> > void mark_rodata_ro(void)
> > {
> > + kernel_set_to_readonly = 1;
> > +
> > stop_machine(__mark_rodata_ro, NULL, NULL);
> > }
> >
> > void set_kernel_text_rw(void)
> > {
> > + if (!kernel_set_to_readonly)
> > + return;
> > +
> > set_section_perms(ro_perms, ARRAY_SIZE(ro_perms), false,
> > current->active_mm);
> > }
> >
> > void set_kernel_text_ro(void)
> > {
> > + if (!kernel_set_to_readonly)
> > + return;
> > +
> > set_section_perms(ro_perms, ARRAY_SIZE(ro_perms), true,
> > current->active_mm);
> > }
>
> Does arm64 suffer from a similar condition? (It looks like no, as text
> patching is done with a fixmap poke.)
>
> -Kees
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists