linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] arm64: wire up VM_FLUSH_RESET

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: <CAKv+Gu9VcXuz8P7-2=MZjDj-7nVOEA8FUE1fRYTvtt1mvt99Yw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Jun 2019 16:29:39 +0200
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] arm64: wire up VM_FLUSH_RESET_PERMS

(+ Catalin)

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 at 13:23, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@....com> wrote:
>
> On 6/24/19 1:16 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:04:20AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:22:52AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >>> Wire up the code introduced in v5.2 to manage the permissions
> >>> of executable vmalloc regions (and their linear aliases) more
> >>> strictly.
> >>>
> >>> One of the things that came up in the internal discussion is
> >>> whether non-x86 architectures have any benefit at all from the
> >>> lazy vunmap feature, and whether it would perhaps be better to
> >>> implement eager vunmap instead.
> >>>
> >>> Cc: Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>
> >>> Cc: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
> >>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> >>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> >>> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
> >>> Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
> >>> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
> >>>
> >>> Ard Biesheuvel (4):
> >>>    arm64: module: create module allocations without exec permissions
> >>>    arm64/mm: wire up CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SET_DIRECT_MAP
> >>>    arm64/kprobes: set VM_FLUSH_RESET_PERMS on kprobe instruction pages
> >>>    arm64: bpf: do not allocate executable memory
> >>>
> >>>   arch/arm64/Kconfig                  |  1 +
> >>>   arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h |  3 ++
> >>>   arch/arm64/kernel/module.c          |  4 +-
> >>>   arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c  |  4 +-
> >>>   arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c            | 48 ++++++++++++++++----
> >>>   arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c       |  2 +-
> >>>   mm/vmalloc.c                        | 11 -----
> >>>   7 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> Thanks, this all looks good to me. I can get pick this up for 5.2 if
> >> Rick's fixes [1] land soon enough.
> >
> > Bah, I missed these landing in -rc5 and I think it's a bit too late for
> > us to take this for 5.2. now particularly with our limited ability to
> > fix any late regressions that might arise.
> >
> > In which case, Catalin, please can you take these for 5.3? You might run
> > into some testing failures with for-next/core due to the late of Rick's
> > fixes, but linux-next should be alright and I don't think you'll get any
> > conflicts.
> >
> > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
> >
> > Ard: are you ok with that?
> >
>
> That is fine, although I won't be around to pick up the pieces by the
> time the merge window opens. Also, I'd like to follow up on the lazy
> vunmap thing for non-x86, but perhaps we can talk about this at plumbers?
>

Actually, you will run into a couple of conflicts. Let me know if you
want me to respin (although they still won't apply cleanly to both
for-next/core and -next)