linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] arm64: kasan: don't populate vmalloc area for CONFIG_KASAN

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:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 12:45:43 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        dan.j.williams@...el.com, aryabinin@...tuozzo.com,
        glider@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, yj.chiang@...iatek.com,
        catalin.marinas@....com, ardb@...nel.org, andreyknvl@...gle.com,
        broonie@...nel.org, linux@...ck-us.net, rppt@...nel.org,
        tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com, robin.murphy@....com,
        vincenzo.frascino@....com, gustavoars@...nel.org,
        Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] arm64: kasan: don't populate vmalloc area for
 CONFIG_KASAN_VMALLOC

On Sat, Jan 09, 2021 at 06:32:49PM +0800, Lecopzer Chen wrote:
> Linux support KAsan for VMALLOC since commit 3c5c3cfb9ef4da9
> ("kasan: support backing vmalloc space with real shadow memory")
> 
> Like how the MODULES_VADDR does now, just not to early populate
> the VMALLOC_START between VMALLOC_END.
> similarly, the kernel code mapping is now in the VMALLOC area and
> should keep these area populated.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/mm/kasan_init.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/kasan_init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/kasan_init.c
> index d8e66c78440e..39b218a64279 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/kasan_init.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/kasan_init.c
> @@ -214,6 +214,7 @@ static void __init kasan_init_shadow(void)
>  {
>  	u64 kimg_shadow_start, kimg_shadow_end;
>  	u64 mod_shadow_start, mod_shadow_end;
> +	u64 vmalloc_shadow_start, vmalloc_shadow_end;
>  	phys_addr_t pa_start, pa_end;
>  	u64 i;
>  
> @@ -223,6 +224,9 @@ static void __init kasan_init_shadow(void)
>  	mod_shadow_start = (u64)kasan_mem_to_shadow((void *)MODULES_VADDR);
>  	mod_shadow_end = (u64)kasan_mem_to_shadow((void *)MODULES_END);
>  
> +	vmalloc_shadow_start = (u64)kasan_mem_to_shadow((void *)VMALLOC_START);
> +	vmalloc_shadow_end = (u64)kasan_mem_to_shadow((void *)VMALLOC_END);
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * We are going to perform proper setup of shadow memory.
>  	 * At first we should unmap early shadow (clear_pgds() call below).
> @@ -241,12 +245,21 @@ static void __init kasan_init_shadow(void)
>  
>  	kasan_populate_early_shadow(kasan_mem_to_shadow((void *)PAGE_END),
>  				   (void *)mod_shadow_start);
> -	kasan_populate_early_shadow((void *)kimg_shadow_end,
> -				   (void *)KASAN_SHADOW_END);
> +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN_VMALLOC)) {

Do we really need yet another CONFIG option for KASAN? What's the use-case
for *not* enabling this if you're already enabling one of the KASAN
backends?

> +		kasan_populate_early_shadow((void *)vmalloc_shadow_end,
> +					    (void *)KASAN_SHADOW_END);
> +		if (vmalloc_shadow_start > mod_shadow_end)

To echo Ard's concern: when is the above 'if' condition true?

Will