[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <badfcf58-9fcb-6189-c9db-e8429f88799e@c-s.fr>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 11:12:35 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
To: Christopher M Riedl <cmr@...ormatik.wtf>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] powerpc/lib: Fixing use a temporary mm for code
patching
Le 15/04/2020 à 07:16, Christopher M Riedl a écrit :
>> On March 26, 2020 9:42 AM Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr> wrote:
>>
>>
>> This patch fixes the RFC series identified below.
>> It fixes three points:
>> - Failure with CONFIG_PPC_KUAP
>> - Failure to write do to lack of DIRTY bit set on the 8xx
>> - Inadequaly complex WARN post verification
>>
>> However, it has an impact on the CPU load. Here is the time
>> needed on an 8xx to run the ftrace selftests without and
>> with this series:
>> - Without CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX ==> 38 seconds
>> - With CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX ==> 40 seconds
>> - With CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX + this series ==> 43 seconds
>>
>> Link: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?series=166003
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c | 5 ++++-
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c b/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c
>> index f156132e8975..4ccff427592e 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c
>> @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ static int map_patch(const void *addr, struct patch_mapping *patch_mapping)
>> }
>>
>> pte = mk_pte(page, pgprot);
>> + pte = pte_mkdirty(pte);
>> set_pte_at(patching_mm, patching_addr, ptep, pte);
>>
>> init_temp_mm(&patch_mapping->temp_mm, patching_mm);
>> @@ -168,7 +169,9 @@ static int do_patch_instruction(unsigned int *addr, unsigned int instr)
>> (offset_in_page((unsigned long)addr) /
>> sizeof(unsigned int));
>>
>> + allow_write_to_user(patch_addr, sizeof(instr));
>> __patch_instruction(addr, instr, patch_addr);
>> + prevent_write_to_user(patch_addr, sizeof(instr));
>>
>
> On radix we can map the page with PAGE_KERNEL protection which ends up
> setting EAA[0] in the radix PTE. This means the KUAP (AMR) protection is
> ignored (ISA v3.0b Fig. 35) since we are accessing the page from MSR[PR]=0.
>
> Can we employ a similar approach on the 8xx? I would prefer *not* to wrap
> the __patch_instruction() with the allow_/prevent_write_to_user() KUAP things
> because this is a temporary kernel mapping which really isn't userspace in
> the usual sense.
On the 8xx, that's pretty different.
The PTE doesn't control whether a page is user page or a kernel page.
The only thing that is set in the PTE is whether a page is linked to a
given PID or not.
PAGE_KERNEL tells that the page can be addressed with any PID.
The user access right is given by a kind of zone, which is in the PGD
entry. Every pages above PAGE_OFFSET are defined as belonging to zone 0.
Every pages below PAGE_OFFSET are defined as belonging to zone 1.
By default, zone 0 can only be accessed by kernel, and zone 1 can only
be accessed by user. When kernel wants to access zone 1, it temporarily
changes properties of zone 1 to allow both kernel and user accesses.
So, if your mapping is below PAGE_OFFSET, it is in zone 1 and kernel
must unlock it to access it.
And this is more or less the same on hash/32. This is managed by segment
registers. One segment register corresponds to a 256Mbytes area. Every
pages below PAGE_OFFSET can only be read by default by kernel. Only user
can write if the PTE allows it. When the kernel needs to write at an
address below PAGE_OFFSET, it must change the segment properties in the
corresponding segment register.
So, for both cases, if we want to have it local to a task while still
allowing kernel access, it means we have to define a new special area
between TASK_SIZE and PAGE_OFFSET which belongs to kernel zone.
That looks complex to me for a small benefit, especially as 8xx is not
SMP and neither are most of the hash/32 targets.
Christophe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists