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, 14 Mar 2024 17:42:20 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org,
 Wupeng Ma <mawupeng1@...wei.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
 Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
 Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] x86/mm/pat: fix VM_PAT handling in COW mappings

On 12.03.24 20:38, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 12.03.24 20:22, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 07:11:18PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> PAT handling won't do the right thing in COW mappings: the first PTE
>>> (or, in fact, all PTEs) can be replaced during write faults to point at
>>> anon folios. Reliably recovering the correct PFN and cachemode using
>>> follow_phys() from PTEs will not work in COW mappings.
>>
>> I guess the first question is: Why do we want to support COW mappings
>> of VM_PAT areas?  What breaks if we just disallow it?
> 
> Well, that was my first approach. Then I decided to be less radical (IOW
> make my life easier by breaking less user space) and "fix it" with
> minimal effort.
> 
> Chances of breaking some weird user space is possible, although I
> believe for most such mappings MAP_PRIVATE doesn't make too much sense
> sense.
> 
> Nasty COW support for VM_PFNMAP mappings dates back forever. So does PAT
> support.
> 
> I can try finding digging through some possible user space users tomorrow.

As discussed, MAP_PRIVATE doesn't make too much sense for most PFNMAP 
mappings.

However, /dev/mem and /proc/vmcore are still used with MAP_PRIVATE in 
some cases.

Side note: /proc/vmcore is a bit weird: mmap_vmcore() sets VM_MIXEDMAP, 
and then we might call remap_pfn_range(), which sets VM_PFNMAP. I'm not 
so sure if that's what we want to happen ...

As far as I can see, makedumpfile always mmap's memory to be dumped 
(/dev/mem, /proc/vmcore) using PROT_READ+MAP_PRIVATE, resulting in a COW 
mapping.


In my opinion, we should use this fairly simple fix to keep it working 
for now and look into disabling any MAP_PRIVATE of VM_PFNMAP separately, 
for all architectures.

But I'll leave the decision to x86 maintainers.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ