[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZsdzKrTbrolW0lHn@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 18:19:38 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: 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>,
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>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Thiago Jung Bauermann <thiago.bauermann@...aro.org>,
Ross Burton <ross.burton@....com>,
Yury Khrustalev <yury.khrustalev@....com>,
Wilco Dijkstra <wilco.dijkstra@....com>,
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 v11 19/39] arm64/mm: Handle GCS data aborts
On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 05:44:19PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 05:12:30PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 02:15:22AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > +static bool is_invalid_gcs_access(struct vm_area_struct *vma, u64 esr)
>
> > > + } else if (unlikely(vma->vm_flags & VM_SHADOW_STACK)) {
> > > + /* Only GCS operations can write to a GCS page */
> > > + return is_write_abort(esr);
> > > + }
>
> > I don't think that's right. The ESR on this path may not even indicate a
> > data abort and ESR.WnR bit check wouldn't make sense.
>
> > I presume we want to avoid an infinite loop on a (writeable) GCS page
> > when the user does a normal STR but the CPU raises a permission fault. I
> > think this function needs to just return false if !esr_is_data_abort().
>
> Yes, that should check for a data abort. I think I'd formed the
> impression that is_write_abort() included that check somehow. As you
> say it's to avoid spinning trying to resolve a permission fault for a
> write (non-GCS reads to a GCS page are valid), I do think we need the
> is_write_abort() since non-GCS reads are valid so something like:
>
> if (!esr_is_data_abort(esr))
> return false;
>
> return is_write_abort(esr);
We do need the write abort check but not unconditionally, only if to a
GCS page (you can have other genuine write aborts).
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists