linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 11/12] mm/vmalloc: Hugepage vmalloc mappings

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: <e9d3a50e1b18f9ea1cdfdc221bef75db19273417.camel@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Nov 2020 20:21:31 +0000
From:   "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To:     "npiggin@...il.com" <npiggin@...il.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:     "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        "lizefan@...wei.com" <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        "Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com" <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
        "christophe.leroy@...roup.eu" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        "hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 11/12] mm/vmalloc: Hugepage vmalloc mappings

On Sun, 2020-11-29 at 01:25 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> Support huge page vmalloc mappings. Config option
> HAVE_ARCH_HUGE_VMALLOC
> enables support on architectures that define HAVE_ARCH_HUGE_VMAP and
> supports PMD sized vmap mappings.
> 
> vmalloc will attempt to allocate PMD-sized pages if allocating PMD
> size
> or larger, and fall back to small pages if that was unsuccessful.
> 
> Allocations that do not use PAGE_KERNEL prot are not permitted to use
> huge pages, because not all callers expect this (e.g., module
> allocations vs strict module rwx).

Several architectures (x86, arm64, others?) allocate modules initially
with PAGE_KERNEL and so I think this test will not exclude module
allocations in those cases.

[snip]

> @@ -2400,6 +2453,7 @@ static inline void set_area_direct_map(const
> struct vm_struct *area,
>  {
>  	int i;
>  
> +	/* HUGE_VMALLOC passes small pages to set_direct_map */
>  	for (i = 0; i < area->nr_pages; i++)
>  		if (page_address(area->pages[i]))
>  			set_direct_map(area->pages[i]);
> @@ -2433,11 +2487,12 @@ static void vm_remove_mappings(struct
> vm_struct *area, int deallocate_pages)
>  	 * map. Find the start and end range of the direct mappings to
> make sure
>  	 * the vm_unmap_aliases() flush includes the direct map.
>  	 */
> -	for (i = 0; i < area->nr_pages; i++) {
> +	for (i = 0; i < area->nr_pages; i += 1U << area->page_order) {
>  		unsigned long addr = (unsigned long)page_address(area-
> >pages[i]);
>  		if (addr) {
> +			unsigned long page_size = PAGE_SIZE << area-
> >page_order;
>  			start = min(addr, start);
> -			end = max(addr + PAGE_SIZE, end);
> +			end = max(addr + page_size, end);
>  			flush_dmap = 1;
>  		}
>  	}

The logic around this is a bit tangled. The reset of the direct map has
to succeed, but if the set_direct_map_() functions require a split they
could fail. For x86, set_memory_ro() calls on a vmalloc alias will
mirror the page size and permission on the direct map and so the direct
map will be broken to 4k pages if it's a RO vmalloc allocation.

But after this, module vmalloc()'s could have large pages which would
result in large RO pages on the direct map. Then it could possibly fail
when trying to reset a 4k page out of a large RO direct map mapping. 

I think either module allocations need to be actually excluded from
having large pages (seems like you might have seen other issues as
well?), or another option could be to use the changes here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20201125092208.12544-4-rppt@kernel.org/
to reset the direct map for a large page range at a time for large 
vmalloc pages.