[RFC PATCH] powerpc/lib: Fixing use a temporary mm for code patching
Christopher M Riedl
cmr at informatik.wtf
Wed Apr 15 15:16:54 AEST 2020
> On March 26, 2020 9:42 AM Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy at c-s.fr> wrote:
>
>
> This patch fixes the RFC series identified below.
> It fixes three points:
> - Failure with CONFIG_PPC_KUAP
> - Failure to write do to lack of DIRTY bit set on the 8xx
> - Inadequaly complex WARN post verification
>
> However, it has an impact on the CPU load. Here is the time
> needed on an 8xx to run the ftrace selftests without and
> with this series:
> - Without CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX ==> 38 seconds
> - With CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX ==> 40 seconds
> - With CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX + this series ==> 43 seconds
>
> Link: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?series=166003
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy at c-s.fr>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c b/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c
> index f156132e8975..4ccff427592e 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c
> @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ static int map_patch(const void *addr, struct patch_mapping *patch_mapping)
> }
>
> pte = mk_pte(page, pgprot);
> + pte = pte_mkdirty(pte);
> set_pte_at(patching_mm, patching_addr, ptep, pte);
>
> init_temp_mm(&patch_mapping->temp_mm, patching_mm);
> @@ -168,7 +169,9 @@ static int do_patch_instruction(unsigned int *addr, unsigned int instr)
> (offset_in_page((unsigned long)addr) /
> sizeof(unsigned int));
>
> + allow_write_to_user(patch_addr, sizeof(instr));
> __patch_instruction(addr, instr, patch_addr);
> + prevent_write_to_user(patch_addr, sizeof(instr));
>
On radix we can map the page with PAGE_KERNEL protection which ends up
setting EAA[0] in the radix PTE. This means the KUAP (AMR) protection is
ignored (ISA v3.0b Fig. 35) since we are accessing the page from MSR[PR]=0.
Can we employ a similar approach on the 8xx? I would prefer *not* to wrap
the __patch_instruction() with the allow_/prevent_write_to_user() KUAP things
because this is a temporary kernel mapping which really isn't userspace in
the usual sense.
> err = unmap_patch(&patch_mapping);
> if (err)
> @@ -179,7 +182,7 @@ static int do_patch_instruction(unsigned int *addr, unsigned int instr)
> * think we just wrote.
> * XXX: BUG_ON() instead?
> */
> - WARN_ON(memcmp(addr, &instr, sizeof(instr)));
> + WARN_ON(*addr != instr);
>
> out:
> local_irq_restore(flags);
> --
> 2.25.0
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list