[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2c67ed3b9dd93e215e5e7489ad56373da789a84d.camel@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2023 03:04:10 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "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>,
"rppt@...ux.ibm.com" <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
"kcc@...gle.com" <kcc@...gle.com>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"pavel@....cz" <pavel@....cz>, "oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"hjl.tools@...il.com" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
"Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@...el.com>,
"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>,
"mike.kravetz@...cle.com" <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 40/41] x86/shstk: Add ARCH_SHSTK_UNLOCK
On Sat, 2023-03-11 at 16:11 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 02:29:56PM -0800, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
> >
> > Userspace loaders may lock features before a CRIU restore operation
> > has
> > the chance to set them to whatever state is required by the process
> > being restored. Allow a way for CRIU to unlock features. Add it as
> > an
> > arch_prctl() like the other shadow stack operations, but restrict
> > it being
> > called by the ptrace arch_pctl() interface.
> >
> > Tested-by: Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@...el.com>
> > Tested-by: John Allen <john.allen@....com>
> > Tested-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> > Acked-by: Mike Rapoport (IBM) <rppt@...nel.org>
>
> That tag is kinda implicit here. Unless he doesn't ACK his own patch.
> :-P
Uhh, right. This was me mindlessly adding his ack to all the patches in
the series.
>
> > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
> > [Merged into recent API changes, added commit log and docs]
> > Signed-off-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
>
> ...
>
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/shstk.c b/arch/x86/kernel/shstk.c
> > index 2faf9b45ac72..3197ff824809 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/shstk.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/shstk.c
> > @@ -451,9 +451,14 @@ long shstk_prctl(struct task_struct *task, int
> > option, unsigned long features)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > - /* Don't allow via ptrace */
> > - if (task != current)
> > + /* Only allow via ptrace */
> > + if (task != current) {
>
> Is that the only case? task != current means ptrace and there's no
> other
> way to do this from userspace?
Not that I could see...
>
> Isn't there some flag which says that task is ptraced? I think we
> should
> check that one too...
This is how the other arch_prctl()s handle it (if they do handle it,
some don't). So I would think it would be nice to keep all the logic
the same.
I guess the flag might work based on the assumption that if the task is
being ptraced, the arch_prctl() couldn't be coming from anywhere else.
Maybe it should get a nicely named helper that they could all use and
whatever best logic could be commented.
Would this maybe be better as a future cleanup that did the change for
them all?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists