linux-kernel - Re: execve(NULL, argv, envp) for nommu?

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]

Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXQn47LK6RLtdgW3JJtL1VwqK7ZvUdmLgaZat8TA30KtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 Sep 2017 13:30:51 +0200
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
Cc:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        Linux Embedded <linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: execve(NULL, argv, envp) for nommu?

Hi Rob,

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net> wrote:
> A nommu system doesn't have a memory management unit, so all addresses
> are physical addresses. This means two processes can't see different
> things at the same address: either they see the same thing or one of
> them can't see that address (due to a range register making it).
>
> Conventional fork() creates copy on write mappings of all the existing
> writable memory of the parent process. So when the new PID dirties a
> page, the old page gets copied by the fault handler. The problem isn't
> the copies (that's just slow), the problem is two processes seeing
> different things at the same address. That requires an MMU with a TLB
> loaded from page tables.
>
> If you create _new_ mappings and copy the data over, they'll have
> different addresses. But any pointers you copied will point to the _old_
> addresses. Finding and adjusting all those pointers to point to the new
> addresses instead is basically the same problem as doing garbage
> collection in C.
>
> Your stack has pointers. Your heap has pointers. Your data and bss (once
> initialized) can have pointers. These pointers can be in the middle of
> malloc()'ed structures so no ELF table anywhere knows anything about
> them. A long variable containing a value that _could_ point into one of
> these ranges isn't guaranteed to _be_ a pointer, in which case adjusting
> it is breakage. Tracking them all down and fixing up just the right ones
> without missing any or changing data you shouldn't is REALLY HARD.

Hence (make the compiler) never store pointers, only offsets relative to a
base register. So after making copies of stack, data/bss, and heap, all you
need to do is adjust these base registers for the child process.
Nothing in main memory needs to be modified.

Text accesses can be PC-relative => nothing to adjust.
Local variable accesses are stack-relative => nothing to adjust.
Data/bss accesses can be relative to a reserved register that stores the
data base address => only adjust the base register, nothing in RAM to adjust.
Heap accesses can be relative to a reserved register that stores the heap
base address => only adjust the base register, nothing in RAM to adjust.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds