linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 12/15] kmap: Add stray write protection for device pages

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]

Date:   Tue, 14 Jul 2020 10:44:51 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     ira.weiny@...el.com
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 12/15] kmap: Add stray write protection for device
 pages

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 12:02:17AM -0700, ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:
> From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> 
> Device managed pages may have additional protections.  These protections
> need to be removed prior to valid use by kernel users.
> 
> Check for special treatment of device managed pages in kmap and take
> action if needed.  We use kmap as an interface for generic kernel code
> because under normal circumstances it would be a bug for general kernel
> code to not use kmap prior to accessing kernel memory.  Therefore, this
> should allow any valid kernel users to seamlessly use these pages
> without issues.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/highmem.h | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/highmem.h b/include/linux/highmem.h
> index d6e82e3de027..7f809d8d5a94 100644
> --- a/include/linux/highmem.h
> +++ b/include/linux/highmem.h
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>  #include <linux/mm.h>
>  #include <linux/uaccess.h>
>  #include <linux/hardirq.h>
> +#include <linux/memremap.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/cacheflush.h>
>  
> @@ -31,6 +32,20 @@ static inline void invalidate_kernel_vmap_range(void *vaddr, int size)
>  
>  #include <asm/kmap_types.h>
>  
> +static inline void enable_access(struct page *page)
> +{
> +	if (!page_is_access_protected(page))
> +		return;
> +	dev_access_enable();
> +}
> +
> +static inline void disable_access(struct page *page)
> +{
> +	if (!page_is_access_protected(page))
> +		return;
> +	dev_access_disable();
> +}

So, if I followed along correctly, you're proposing to do a WRMSR per
k{,un}map{_atomic}(), sounds like excellent performance all-round :-(