| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAGWkznHK0pDQQOOg-zPnr42EB__X84MF0AHU=b8VL_yuhPOBbA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 17:17:26 +0800
From: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>,
Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] arch: arm64: introduce RODATA_FULL_USE_PTE_CONT
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 5:04 PM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 at 10:00, Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 4:52 PM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 at 06:29, Huangzhaoyang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>
> > > >
> > > > Kernel linear mapping will be split to the smallest granularity when
> > > > RODATA_FULL applied, which could lead to TLB pressure. Introduce a method
> > > > to apply PTE_CONT on pte.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>
> > >
> > > How would this lead to TLB pressure, and how does the use of
> > > contiguous mappings mitigate that? The linear mapping of the kernel is
> > > rarely used, as all normal accesses to it go via the vmalloc region,
> > > so in which case would TLB entries be allocated for this region in a
> > > way that could cause a measurable performance impact?
> > In fact, the patch is about to use PTE_CONT *OUT OF* the range of
> > kernel text.
>
> OK, I had missed that, apologies.
>
> > Would you please have a look at the code. It apply
> > PTE_CONT during map_mem and then clear it when load_module change the
> > corresponding linear mapping to the area it use in vmalloc area.
>
> You cannot change the PTE_CONT attribute on live mappings.
Is it an inner constraint from ASIC perspective? PTE_CONT is different
to other attributes?
>
> > >
> > >
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 9 +++++++++
> > > > arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 10 ++++++++--
> > > > arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c | 9 +++++++++
> > > > 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> > > > index fee914c..3f8fbf0 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> > > > @@ -1198,6 +1198,15 @@ config RODATA_FULL_DEFAULT_ENABLED
> > > > This requires the linear region to be mapped down to pages,
> > > > which may adversely affect performance in some cases.
> > > >
> > > > +config RODATA_FULL_USE_PTE_CONT
> > > > + bool "Apply PTE_CONT when RODATA_FULL_DEFAULT_ENABLED enabled"
> > > > + depends on RODATA_FULL_DEFAULT_ENABLED
> > > > + default y
> > > > + help
> > > > + Apply PTE_CONT on linear mapping as much as we can when
> > > > + RODATA_FULL_DEFAULT_ENABLED enabled which could decrease the
> > > > + impaction on performance by small pte granularity.
> > > > +
> > > > config ARM64_SW_TTBR0_PAN
> > > > bool "Emulate Privileged Access Never using TTBR0_EL1 switching"
> > > > help
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > > > index cfd9deb..8017b17 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > > > @@ -124,15 +124,21 @@ static bool pgattr_change_is_safe(u64 old, u64 new)
> > > > * The following mapping attributes may be updated in live
> > > > * kernel mappings without the need for break-before-make.
> > > > */
> > > > +#ifndef CONFIG_RODATA_FULL_USE_PTE_CONT
> > > > pteval_t mask = PTE_PXN | PTE_RDONLY | PTE_WRITE | PTE_NG;
> > > > +#else
> > > > + pteval_t mask = PTE_PXN | PTE_RDONLY | PTE_WRITE | PTE_NG | PTE_CONT;
> > > > +#endif
>
> What justifies this change? Why is it ok in certain cases to update
> the PTE_CONT attribute without BBM?
BBM?
I am not sure if it is ok here, but I just find nobody else change
PTE_CONT so far other than this commit.
>
> > > >
> > > > /* creating or taking down mappings is always safe */
> > > > if (old == 0 || new == 0)
> > > > return true;
> > > >
> > > > /* live contiguous mappings may not be manipulated at all */
> > > > - if ((old | new) & PTE_CONT)
> > > > +#ifndef CONFIG_RODATA_FULL_USE_PTE_CONT
> > > > + if ((old | new) & PTE_CONT)
> > > > return false;
> > > > +#endif
> > > >
> > > > /* Transitioning from Non-Global to Global is unsafe */
> > > > if (old & ~new & PTE_NG)
> > > > @@ -206,7 +212,7 @@ static void alloc_init_cont_pte(pmd_t *pmdp, unsigned long addr,
> > > >
> > > > /* use a contiguous mapping if the range is suitably aligned */
> > > > if ((((addr | next | phys) & ~CONT_PTE_MASK) == 0) &&
> > > > - (flags & NO_CONT_MAPPINGS) == 0)
> > > > + (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RODATA_FULL_USE_PTE_CONT) || (flags & NO_CONT_MAPPINGS) == 0))
> > > > __prot = __pgprot(pgprot_val(prot) | PTE_CONT);
> > > >
> > > > init_pte(pmdp, addr, next, phys, __prot);
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c b/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c
> > > > index a3bacd7..88a87eb 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c
> > > > @@ -99,6 +99,15 @@ static int change_memory_common(unsigned long addr, int numpages,
> > > > if (rodata_full && (pgprot_val(set_mask) == PTE_RDONLY ||
> > > > pgprot_val(clear_mask) == PTE_RDONLY)) {
> > > > for (i = 0; i < area->nr_pages; i++) {
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_RODATA_FULL_USE_PTE_CONT
> > > > + unsigned long cont_pte_low_bound;
> > > > + unsigned long addr;
> > > > +
> > > > + addr = (u64)page_address(area->pages[i]);
> > > > + cont_pte_low_bound = addr & CONT_PTE_MASK;
> > > > + __change_memory_common(cont_pte_low_bound,
> > > > + (~CONT_PTE_MASK + 1), __pgprot(0) , __pgprot(PTE_CONT));
> > > > +#endif
> > > > __change_memory_common((u64)page_address(area->pages[i]),
> > > > PAGE_SIZE, set_mask, clear_mask);
> > > > }
> > > > --
> > > > 1.9.1
> > > >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists