linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 2/3] arm64: mm: implement arch_faults_on_old

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: <20191001143219.018281be@why>
Date:   Tue, 1 Oct 2019 14:32:19 +0100
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jia He <justin.he@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, Punit Agrawal <punitagrawal@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, hejianet@...il.com,
        Kaly Xin <Kaly.Xin@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/3] arm64: mm: implement arch_faults_on_old_pte()
 on arm64

On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 13:50:32 +0100
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 09:57:39AM +0800, Jia He wrote:
> > On arm64 without hardware Access Flag, copying fromuser will fail because
> > the pte is old and cannot be marked young. So we always end up with zeroed
> > page after fork() + CoW for pfn mappings. we don't always have a
> > hardware-managed access flag on arm64.
> > 
> > Hence implement arch_faults_on_old_pte on arm64 to indicate that it might
> > cause page fault when accessing old pte.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jia He <justin.he@....com>
> > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> > index 7576df00eb50..e96fb82f62de 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> > @@ -885,6 +885,20 @@ static inline void update_mmu_cache(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> >  #define phys_to_ttbr(addr)	(addr)
> >  #endif
> >  
> > +/*
> > + * On arm64 without hardware Access Flag, copying from user will fail because
> > + * the pte is old and cannot be marked young. So we always end up with zeroed
> > + * page after fork() + CoW for pfn mappings. We don't always have a
> > + * hardware-managed access flag on arm64.
> > + */
> > +static inline bool arch_faults_on_old_pte(void)
> > +{
> > +	WARN_ON(preemptible());
> > +
> > +	return !cpu_has_hw_af();
> > +}  
> 
> Does this work correctly in a KVM guest? (i.e. is the MMFR sanitised in that
> case, despite not being the case on the host?)

Yup, all the 64bit MMFRs are trapped (HCR_EL2.TID3 is set for an
AArch64 guest), and we return the sanitised version.

But that's an interesting remark: we're now trading an extra fault on
CPUs that do not support HWAFDBS for a guaranteed trap for each and
every guest under the sun that will hit the COW path...

My gut feeling is that this is going to be pretty visible. Jia, do you
have any numbers for this kind of behaviour?

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.