netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 06/13] mm/execmem: introduce execmem_data

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: <CAPhsuW4_3oYhN6LnPPyBVA4VAM=7voXKmcJNKLqiNEUboq1rnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2023 01:55:29 -0700
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, 
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, 
	Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org>, 
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>, Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>, 
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>, 
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, 
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>, 
	"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, 
	Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@...il.com>, Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, 
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, 
	Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, 
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, 
	"linux-mips@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, 
	"linux-modules@...r.kernel.org" <linux-modules@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, 
	"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, 
	"loongarch@...ts.linux.dev" <loongarch@...ts.linux.dev>, 
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"sparclinux@...r.kernel.org" <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/13] mm/execmem: introduce execmem_data_alloc()

On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 12:17 AM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.leroy@...roup.eu> wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 22/09/2023 à 00:52, Song Liu a écrit :
> > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 12:31 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org> wrote:
> >>
> > [...]
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/execmem.h b/include/linux/execmem.h
> >> index 519bdfdca595..09d45ac786e9 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/execmem.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/execmem.h
> >> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
> >>    * @EXECMEM_KPROBES: parameters for kprobes
> >>    * @EXECMEM_FTRACE: parameters for ftrace
> >>    * @EXECMEM_BPF: parameters for BPF
> >> + * @EXECMEM_MODULE_DATA: parameters for module data sections
> >>    * @EXECMEM_TYPE_MAX:
> >>    */
> >>   enum execmem_type {
> >> @@ -37,6 +38,7 @@ enum execmem_type {
> >>          EXECMEM_KPROBES,
> >>          EXECMEM_FTRACE,
> >
> > In longer term, I think we can improve the JITed code and merge
> > kprobe/ftrace/bpf. to use the same ranges. Also, do we need special
> > setting for FTRACE? If not, let's just remove it.
>
> How can we do that ? Some platforms like powerpc require executable
> memory for BPF and non-exec mem for KPROBE so it can't be in the same
> area/ranges.

Hmm... non-exec mem for kprobes?

       if (strict_module_rwx_enabled())
               execmem_params.ranges[EXECMEM_KPROBES].pgprot = PAGE_KERNEL_ROX;
       else
               execmem_params.ranges[EXECMEM_KPROBES].pgprot = PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC;

Do you mean the latter case?

Thanks,
Song