[PATCH v3 4/5] powerpc/fault: Avoid heavy search_exception_tables() verification

[Christophe Leroy]

Le 08/12/2020 à 14:00, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit :
> On 12/8/20 2:07 PM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> search_exception_tables() is an heavy operation, we have to avoid it.
>> When KUAP is selected, we'll know the fault has been blocked by KUAP.
>> Otherwise, it behaves just as if the address was already in the TLBs
>> and no fault was generated.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy at csgroup.eu>
>> Reviewed-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com>
>> ---
>> v3: rebased
>> v2: Squashed with the preceeding patch which was re-ordering tests that get removed in this patch.
>> ---
>>   arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c | 23 +++++++----------------
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
>> index 3fcd34c28e10..1770b41e4730 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
>> @@ -210,28 +210,19 @@ static bool bad_kernel_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code,
>>           return true;
>>       }
>> -    if (!is_exec && address < TASK_SIZE && (error_code & (DSISR_PROTFAULT | DSISR_KEYFAULT)) &&
>> -        !search_exception_tables(regs->nip)) {
>> -        pr_crit_ratelimited("Kernel attempted to access user page (%lx) - exploit attempt? (uid: 
>> %d)\n",
>> -                    address,
>> -                    from_kuid(&init_user_ns, current_uid()));
>> -    }
>> -
>>       // Kernel fault on kernel address is bad
>>       if (address >= TASK_SIZE)
>>           return true;
>> -    // Fault on user outside of certain regions (eg. copy_tofrom_user()) is bad
>> -    if (!search_exception_tables(regs->nip))
>> -        return true;
>> -
>> -    // Read/write fault in a valid region (the exception table search passed
>> -    // above), but blocked by KUAP is bad, it can never succeed.
>> -    if (bad_kuap_fault(regs, address, is_write))
>> +    // Read/write fault blocked by KUAP is bad, it can never succeed.
>> +    if (bad_kuap_fault(regs, address, is_write)) {
>> +        pr_crit_ratelimited("Kernel attempted to %s user page (%lx) - exploit attempt? (uid: %d)\n",
>> +                    is_write ? "write" : "read", address,
>> +                    from_kuid(&init_user_ns, current_uid()));
>>           return true;
>> +    }
> 
> 
> Should we update bad_kuap_fault to check for !is_kernel_addr() and error_code & (DSISIR_PROT_FAULT | 
> DSISIR_KEYFAULT). I am wondering whether we can take another fault w.r.t kernel address/user address 
> and end up reporting that as KUAP fault?

Just before this we do:

	if (address >= TASK_SIZE)
		return true;

About the error code, I don't know. Can we take a fault that is not a DSISR_PROT_FAULT |
  DSISR_KEYFAULT and that is not a KUAP fault ?

Previously (before this patch), the error code was taken into account for the call to 
search_exception_tables(), but has never been for the bad_kuap_fault().

> 
>> -    // What's left? Kernel fault on user in well defined regions (extable
>> -    // matched), and allowed by KUAP in the faulting context.
>> +    // What's left? Kernel fault on user and allowed by KUAP in the faulting context.
>>       return false;
>>   }
>>
> 
> 
> -aneesh

Christophe