[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f300404f-91a9-40ae-8fcc-2e855b43ac76@lucifer.local>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 06:15:40 +0000
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
To: jeffxu@...omium.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, keescook@...omium.org, jannh@...gle.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org, oleg@...hat.com, avagin@...il.com,
benjamin@...solutions.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
jorgelo@...omium.org, sroettger@...gle.com, hch@....de,
ojeda@...nel.org, thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de, adobriyan@...il.com,
johannes@...solutions.net, pedro.falcato@...il.com, hca@...ux.ibm.com,
willy@...radead.org, anna-maria@...utronix.de, mark.rutland@....com,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, Jason@...c4.com, deller@....de,
rdunlap@...radead.org, davem@...emloft.net, peterx@...hat.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, gerg@...nel.org, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
mingo@...nel.org, ardb@...nel.org, mhocko@...e.com,
42.hyeyoo@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org, ardb@...gle.com,
enh@...gle.com, rientjes@...gle.com, groeck@...omium.org,
mpe@...erman.id.au, aleksandr.mikhalitsyn@...onical.com,
mike.rapoport@...il.com, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/7] selftests: x86: test_mremap_vdso: skip if vdso is
msealed
On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 10:52:41PM +0000, jeffxu@...omium.org wrote:
> From: Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...omium.org>
>
> Add code to detect if the vdso is memory sealed, skip the test
> if it is.
I feel this is a little succinct of a commit message, but I guess it gets to the
heart of what you're doing here.
Fundamentally I mean it makes sense, but I'm concerned that x86 has a test
-expliictly checking- whether mremap() of VDSO is possible - are there cases
where x86 might want to do this internal to the kernel?
I guess not since this is essentially a userland self test and probably
asserting you can do this in the way rr, etc. do.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...omium.org>
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Anyway, this aside, this looks fine, aside from nit below, so:
Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
> ---
> .../testing/selftests/x86/test_mremap_vdso.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_mremap_vdso.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_mremap_vdso.c
> index d53959e03593..94bee6e0c813 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_mremap_vdso.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_mremap_vdso.c
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> #include <errno.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <string.h>
> +#include <stdbool.h>
>
> #include <sys/mman.h>
> #include <sys/auxv.h>
> @@ -55,13 +56,55 @@ static int try_to_remap(void *vdso_addr, unsigned long size)
>
> }
>
> +#define VDSO_NAME "[vdso]"
> +#define VMFLAGS "VmFlags:"
> +#define MSEAL_FLAGS "sl"
> +#define MAX_LINE_LEN 512
> +
> +bool vdso_sealed(FILE *maps)
Should be static?
> +{
> + char line[MAX_LINE_LEN];
> + bool has_vdso = false;
> +
> + while (fgets(line, sizeof(line), maps)) {
> + if (strstr(line, VDSO_NAME))
> + has_vdso = true;
> +
> + if (has_vdso && !strncmp(line, VMFLAGS, strlen(VMFLAGS))) {
> + if (strstr(line, MSEAL_FLAGS))
> + return true;
> +
> + return false;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
> {
> pid_t child;
> + FILE *maps;
>
> ksft_print_header();
> ksft_set_plan(1);
>
> + maps = fopen("/proc/self/smaps", "r");
> + if (!maps) {
> + ksft_test_result_skip(
> + "Could not open /proc/self/smaps, errno=%d\n",
> + errno);
> +
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + if (vdso_sealed(maps)) {
> + ksft_test_result_skip("vdso is sealed\n");
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + fclose(maps);
> +
> child = fork();
> if (child == -1)
> ksft_exit_fail_msg("failed to fork (%d): %m\n", errno);
> --
> 2.48.1.658.g4767266eb4-goog
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists