linux-kernel - [PATCH v9 03/21] arm64: mm: Add p?d

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: <20190722154210.42799-4-steven.price@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:41:52 +0100
From:   Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
To:     linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
        "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH v9 03/21] arm64: mm: Add p?d_leaf() definitions

walk_page_range() is going to be allowed to walk page tables other than
those of user space. For this it needs to know when it has reached a
'leaf' entry in the page tables. This information will be provided by the
p?d_leaf() functions/macros.

For arm64, we already have p?d_sect() macros which we can reuse for
p?d_leaf().

pud_sect() is defined as a dummy function when CONFIG_PGTABLE_LEVELS < 3
or CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES is defined. However when the kernel is
configured this way then architecturally it isn't allowed to have a
large page that this level, and any code using these page walking macros
is implicitly relying on the page size/number of levels being the same as
the kernel. So it is safe to reuse this for p?d_leaf() as it is an
architectural restriction.

CC: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
CC: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
index 87a4b2ddc1a1..2c123d59dbff 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
@@ -446,6 +446,7 @@ extern pgprot_t phys_mem_access_prot(struct file *file, unsigned long pfn,
 				 PMD_TYPE_TABLE)
 #define pmd_sect(pmd)		((pmd_val(pmd) & PMD_TYPE_MASK) == \
 				 PMD_TYPE_SECT)
+#define pmd_leaf(pmd)		pmd_sect(pmd)
 
 #if defined(CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES) || CONFIG_PGTABLE_LEVELS < 3
 #define pud_sect(pud)		(0)
@@ -528,6 +529,7 @@ static inline void pte_unmap(pte_t *pte) { }
 #define pud_none(pud)		(!pud_val(pud))
 #define pud_bad(pud)		(!(pud_val(pud) & PUD_TABLE_BIT))
 #define pud_present(pud)	pte_present(pud_pte(pud))
+#define pud_leaf(pud)		pud_sect(pud)
 #define pud_valid(pud)		pte_valid(pud_pte(pud))
 
 static inline void set_pud(pud_t *pudp, pud_t pud)
-- 
2.20.1