[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aR4GhuhEISNSSbUf@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 18:03:50 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
Cc: will@...nel.org, ryan.roberts@....com, rppt@...nel.org,
shijie@...amperecomputing.com, yang@...amperecomputing.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64/pageattr: Propagate return value from
__change_memory_common
On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 11:57:15AM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
> The rodata=on security measure requires that any code path which does
> vmalloc -> set_memory_ro/set_memory_rox must protect the linear map alias
> too. Therefore, if such a call fails, we must abort set_memory_* and caller
> must take appropriate action; currently we are suppressing the error, and
> there is a real chance of such an error arising post commit a166563e7ec3
> ("arm64: mm: support large block mapping when rodata=full"). Therefore,
> propagate any error to the caller.
>
> Fixes: a166563e7ec3 ("arm64: mm: support large block mapping when rodata=full")
> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
> ---
> v1 of this patch: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251103061306.82034-1-dev.jain@arm.com/
> I have dropped stable since no real chance of failure was there.
I couldn't figure out from the comments on v1 whether Will's concern was
addressed:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/aQn4EwKar66UZ7rz@willie-the-truck/
IOW, is the patch necessary? What are the failure scenarios and what
does the caller do? It's good to propagate an error to the caller but
patch also changes the current behaviour by bailing out earlier.
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists