[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230801170231.GC2607694@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2023 20:02:31 +0300
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
"Rick P. Edgecombe" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/36] arm64/mm: Map pages for guarded control stack
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 02:43:20PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> Map pages flagged as being part of a GCS as such rather than using the
> full set of generic VM flags.
>
> This is done using a conditional rather than extending the size of
> protection_map since that would make for a very sparse array.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
> ---
> arch/arm64/mm/mmap.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmap.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmap.c
> index 8f5b7ce857ed..e2ca770920ed 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmap.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmap.c
> @@ -79,8 +79,23 @@ arch_initcall(adjust_protection_map);
>
> pgprot_t vm_get_page_prot(unsigned long vm_flags)
> {
> - pteval_t prot = pgprot_val(protection_map[vm_flags &
> + pteval_t prot;
> +
> + /*
> + * If this is a GCS then only interpret VM_WRITE.
> + *
> + * TODO: Just make protection_map[] bigger? Nothing seems
> + * ideal here.
> + */
I think extending protection_map and updating adjust_protection_map() is
cleaner and probably faster.
> + if (system_supports_gcs() && (vm_flags & VM_SHADOW_STACK)) {
> + if (vm_flags & VM_WRITE)
> + prot = _PAGE_GCS;
> + else
> + prot = _PAGE_GCS_RO;
> + } else {
> + prot = pgprot_val(protection_map[vm_flags &
> (VM_READ|VM_WRITE|VM_EXEC|VM_SHARED)]);
> + }
>
> if (vm_flags & VM_ARM64_BTI)
> prot |= PTE_GP;
>
> --
> 2.30.2
>
>
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists