[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <106f8670-3dd0-70ad-91ac-4f419585df50@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 10:56:02 +0100
From: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
Elena Petrova <lenaptr@...gle.com>,
Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@....com>,
Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 29/39] arm64: mte: Switch GCR_EL1 in kernel entry and
exit
On 10/9/20 9:11 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 07:24:12PM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
>> On 10/2/20 3:06 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 01:10:30AM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>>>> index 7c67ac6f08df..d1847f29f59b 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
>>>> @@ -23,6 +23,8 @@
>>>> #include <asm/ptrace.h>
>>>> #include <asm/sysreg.h>
>>>>
>>>> +u64 gcr_kernel_excl __ro_after_init;
>>>> +
>>>> static void mte_sync_page_tags(struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, bool check_swap)
>>>> {
>>>> pte_t old_pte = READ_ONCE(*ptep);
>>>> @@ -120,6 +122,13 @@ void *mte_set_mem_tag_range(void *addr, size_t size, u8 tag)
>>>> return ptr;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +void mte_init_tags(u64 max_tag)
>>>> +{
>>>> + u64 incl = GENMASK(max_tag & MTE_TAG_MAX, 0);
>>>
>>> Nitpick: it's not obvious that MTE_TAG_MAX is a mask, so better write
>>> this as GENMASK(min(max_tag, MTE_TAG_MAX), 0).
>>
>> The two things do not seem equivalent because the format of the tags in KASAN is
>> 0xFF and in MTE is 0xF, hence if extract the minimum whatever is the tag passed
>> by KASAN it will always be MTE_TAG_MAX.
>>
>> To make it cleaner I propose: GENMASK(FIELD_GET(MTE_TAG_MAX, max_tag), 0);
>
> I don't think that's any clearer since FIELD_GET still assumes that
> MTE_TAG_MAX is a mask. I think it's better to add a comment on why this
> is needed, as you explained above that the KASAN tags go to 0xff.
>
> If you want to get rid of MTE_TAG_MAX altogether, just do a
>
> max_tag &= (1 << MAX_TAG_SIZE) - 1;
>
> before setting incl (a comment is still useful).
>
Agree, but still think we should use FIELD_GET here since it is common language
in the kernel.
How about we get rid of MTE_TAG_MAX and we do something like:
GENMASK(FIELD_GET(MTE_TAG_MASK >> MTE_TAG_SHIFT, max_tag), 0);
Obviously with a comment ;)
--
Regards,
Vincenzo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists