[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c67f511516d2f28385bbe079b7d7d40f136adb27.camel@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 23:07:39 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>,
"bsingharora@...il.com" <bsingharora@...il.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Syromiatnikov, Eugene" <esyr@...hat.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"rdunlap@...radead.org" <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"Eranian, Stephane" <eranian@...gle.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"fweimer@...hat.com" <fweimer@...hat.com>,
"nadav.amit@...il.com" <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
"jannh@...gle.com" <jannh@...gle.com>,
"dethoma@...rosoft.com" <dethoma@...rosoft.com>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"kcc@...gle.com" <kcc@...gle.com>, "pavel@....cz" <pavel@....cz>,
"oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"hjl.tools@...il.com" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"Lutomirski, Andy" <luto@...nel.org>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Schimpe, Christina" <christina.schimpe@...el.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"mike.kravetz@...cle.com" <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
"Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@...el.com>,
"debug@...osinc.com" <debug@...osinc.com>,
"jamorris@...ux.microsoft.com" <jamorris@...ux.microsoft.com>,
"john.allen@....com" <john.allen@....com>,
"rppt@...nel.org" <rppt@...nel.org>,
"andrew.cooper3@...rix.com" <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"gorcunov@...il.com" <gorcunov@...il.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: "Yu, Yu-cheng" <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 19/41] x86/mm: Check shadow stack page fault errors
On Mon, 2023-02-20 at 13:57 +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >
> > + /*
> > + * When a page becomes COW it changes from a shadow stack
> > permission
> > + * page (Write=0,Dirty=1) to (Write=0,Dirty=0,SavedDirty=1),
> > which is simply
> > + * read-only to the CPU. When shadow stack is enabled, a RET
> > would
> > + * normally pop the shadow stack by reading it with a "shadow
> > stack
> > + * read" access. However, in the COW case the shadow stack
> > memory does
> > + * not have shadow stack permissions, it is read-only. So it
> > will
> > + * generate a fault.
> > + *
> > + * For conventionally writable pages, a read can be serviced
> > with a
> > + * read only PTE, and COW would not have to happen. But for
> > shadow
> > + * stack, there isn't the concept of read-only shadow stack
> > memory.
> > + * If it is shadow stack permission, it can be modified via
> > CALL and
> > + * RET instructions. So COW needs to happen before any memory
> > can be
> > + * mapped with shadow stack permissions.
> > + *
> > + * Shadow stack accesses (read or write) need to be serviced
> > with
> > + * shadow stack permission memory, so in the case of a shadow
> > stack
> > + * read access, treat it as a WRITE fault so both COW will
> > happen and
> > + * the write fault path will tickle maybe_mkwrite() and map
> > the memory
> > + * shadow stack.
> > + */
>
> Again, I suggest dropping all details about COW from this comment
> and
> from the patch description. It's just one such case that can happen.
Hi David,
I was just trying to edit this one to drop COW details, but I think in
this case, one of the major reasons for the code *is* actually COW. We
are not working around the whole inadvertent shadow stack memory piece
here, but something else: Making sure shadow stack memory is faulted in
and doing COW if required to make this possible. I came up with this,
does it seem better?
/*
* For conventionally writable pages, a read can be serviced with a
*
read only PTE. But for shadow stack, there isn't a concept of
* read-
only shadow stack memory. If it a PTE has the shadow stack
*
permission, it can be modified via CALL and RET instructions. So
* core
MM needs to fault in a writable PTE and do things it already
* does for
write faults.
*
* Shadow stack accesses (read or write) need to be
serviced with
* shadow stack permission memory, so in the case of a
shadow stack
* read access, treat it as a WRITE fault so both any
required COW will
* happen and the write fault path will tickle
maybe_mkwrite() and map
* the memory shadow stack.
*/
Thanks,
Rick
Powered by blists - more mailing lists