[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <D9EV6ZHETDM6.36DJZQTQ487O1@ventanamicro.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 14:23:37 +0200
From: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...tanamicro.com>
To: "Deepak Gupta" <debug@...osinc.com>
Cc: "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Ingo Molnar"
<mingo@...hat.com>, "Borislav Petkov" <bp@...en8.de>, "Dave Hansen"
<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <x86@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin"
<hpa@...or.com>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Liam R.
Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, "Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@...e.cz>,
"Lorenzo Stoakes" <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, "Paul Walmsley"
<paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, "Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@...belt.com>, "Albert
Ou" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, "Conor Dooley" <conor@...nel.org>, "Rob
Herring" <robh@...nel.org>, "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>, "Christian Brauner" <brauner@...nel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>, "Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Eric Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, "Kees Cook" <kees@...nel.org>,
"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@....net>, "Shuah Khan" <shuah@...nel.org>, "Jann
Horn" <jannh@...gle.com>, "Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
<alistair.francis@....com>, <richard.henderson@...aro.org>,
<jim.shu@...ive.com>, <andybnac@...il.com>, <kito.cheng@...ive.com>,
<charlie@...osinc.com>, <atishp@...osinc.com>, <evan@...osinc.com>,
<cleger@...osinc.com>, <alexghiti@...osinc.com>, <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
<broonie@...nel.org>, <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "Zong Li"
<zong.li@...ive.com>, "linux-riscv"
<linux-riscv-bounces@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 06/28] riscv/mm : ensure PROT_WRITE leads to VM_READ
| VM_WRITE
2025-04-23T17:45:53-07:00, Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com>:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 12:03:44PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>>2025-03-14T14:39:25-07:00, Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com>:
>>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_riscv.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_riscv.c
>>> @@ -16,6 +17,15 @@ static long riscv_sys_mmap(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
>>> + /*
>>> + * If PROT_WRITE is specified then extend that to PROT_READ
>>> + * protection_map[VM_WRITE] is now going to select shadow stack encodings.
>>> + * So specifying PROT_WRITE actually should select protection_map [VM_WRITE | VM_READ]
>>> + * If user wants to create shadow stack then they should use `map_shadow_stack` syscall.
>>> + */
>>> + if (unlikely((prot & PROT_WRITE) && !(prot & PROT_READ)))
>>> + prot |= PROT_READ;
>>
>>Why isn't the previous hunk be enough? (Or why don't we do just this?)
>>
>>riscv_sys_mmap() eventually calls arch_calc_vm_prot_bits(), so I'd
>>rather fix each code path just once.
>
> You're right. Above hunk (arch/riscv/include/asm/mman.h) alone should be enough.
> I did this change in `sys_riscv.c` out of caution. If it feels like un-necessary,
> I'll remove it. No hard feelings either way.
I think it makes the code harder to reason about. Here it is not clear
why this caller of ksys_mmap_pgoff() has to do this, while others don't.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists