linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 6/7] execmem: add support for cache of large ROX pages

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]

Message-ID: <20240416075234.GA31647@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 09:52:34 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>,
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/7] execmem: add support for cache of large ROX pages

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 08:00:26PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 12:47:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 07:05:25PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > 
> > > To populate the cache, a writable large page is allocated from vmalloc with
> > > VM_ALLOW_HUGE_VMAP, filled with invalid instructions and then remapped as
> > > ROX.
> > 
> > > +static void execmem_invalidate(void *ptr, size_t size, bool writable)
> > > +{
> > > +	if (execmem_info->invalidate)
> > > +		execmem_info->invalidate(ptr, size, writable);
> > > +	else
> > > +		memset(ptr, 0, size);
> > > +}
> > 
> > +static void execmem_invalidate(void *ptr, size_t size, bool writeable)
> > +{
> > +       /* fill memory with INT3 instructions */
> > +       if (writeable)
> > +               memset(ptr, 0xcc, size);
> > +       else
> > +               text_poke_set(ptr, 0xcc, size);
> > +}
> > 
> > Thing is, 0xcc (aka INT3_INSN_OPCODE) is not an invalid instruction.
> > It raises #BP not #UD.
> 
> Do you mean that _invalidate is a poor name choice or that it's necessary
> to use an instruction that raises #UD?

Poor naming, mostly. #BP handler will still scream bloody murder if the
site is otherwise unclaimed.

It just isn't an invalid instruction.