[PATCH v2 07/12] arm64, execmem: extend execmem_params for generated code definitions

[Kent Overstreet]

On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 09:38:17AM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 8:37 AM Kent Overstreet
> <kent.overstreet at linux.dev> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 09:57:59AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > This is growing fast. :) We have 3 now: text, data, jit. And it will be
> > > > 5 when we split data into rw data, ro data, ro after init data. I wonder
> > > > whether we should still do some type enum here. But we can revisit
> > > > this topic later.
> > >
> > > I don't think we'd need 5. Four at most :)
> > >
> > > I don't know yet what would be the best way to differentiate RW and RO
> > > data, but ro_after_init surely won't need a new type. It either will be
> > > allocated as RW and then the caller will have to set it RO after
> > > initialization is done, or it will be allocated as RO and the caller will
> > > have to do something like text_poke to update it.
> >
> > Perhaps ro_after_init could use the same allocation interface and share
> > pages with ro pages - if we just added a refcount for "this page
> > currently needs to be rw, module is still loading?"
> 
> If we don't relax rules with read only, we will have to separate rw, ro,
> and ro_after_init. But we can still have page sharing:
> 
> Two modules can put rw data on the same page.
> With text poke (ro data poke to be accurate), two modules can put
> ro data on the same page.
> 
> > text_poke() approach wouldn't be workable, you'd have to audit and fix
> > all module init code in the entire kernel.
> 
> Agreed. For this reason, each module has to have its own page(s) for
> ro_after_init data.

Relaxing page permissions to allow for page sharing could also be a
config option. For archs with 64k pages it seems worthwhile.