All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@arm.com>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
	Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
	Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] kasan, arm64: Add KASAN light mode
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2021 15:08:11 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210115150811.GA44111@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210115120043.50023-2-vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:00:40PM +0000, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
> Architectures supported by KASAN HW can provide a light mode of
> execution. On an MTE enabled arm64 hw for example this can be identified
> with the asynch mode of execution.
> In this mode, if a tag check fault occurs, the TFSR_EL1 register is
> updated asynchronously. The kernel checks the corresponding bits
> periodically.

What's the expected usage of this relative to prod, given that this has
to be chosen at boot time? When/where is this expected to be used
relative to prod mode?

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> index 18fce223b67b..3a7c5beb7096 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ static inline const void *__tag_set(const void *addr, u8 tag)
>  }
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS
> -#define arch_enable_tagging()			mte_enable_kernel()
> +#define arch_enable_tagging(mode)		mte_enable_kernel(mode)

Rather than passing a mode in, I think it'd be better to have:

* arch_enable_tagging_prod()
* arch_enable_tagging_light()

... that we can map in the arch code to separate:

* mte_enable_kernel_sync()
* mte_enable_kernel_async()

... as by construction that avoids calls with an unhandled mode, and we
wouldn't need the mode enum kasan_hw_tags_mode...

> +static inline int hw_init_mode(enum kasan_arg_mode mode)
> +{
> +	switch (mode) {
> +	case KASAN_ARG_MODE_LIGHT:
> +		return KASAN_HW_TAGS_ASYNC;
> +	default:
> +		return KASAN_HW_TAGS_SYNC;
> +	}
> +}

... and we can just have a wrapper like this to call either of the two functions directly, i.e.

static inline void hw_enable_tagging_mode(enum kasan_arg_mode mode)
{
	if (mode == KASAN_ARG_MODE_LIGHT)
		arch_enable_tagging_mode_light();
	else
		arch_enable_tagging_mode_prod();
}

Thanks,
Mark.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
Cc: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@arm.com>,
	kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
	Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] kasan, arm64: Add KASAN light mode
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2021 15:08:11 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210115150811.GA44111@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210115120043.50023-2-vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:00:40PM +0000, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
> Architectures supported by KASAN HW can provide a light mode of
> execution. On an MTE enabled arm64 hw for example this can be identified
> with the asynch mode of execution.
> In this mode, if a tag check fault occurs, the TFSR_EL1 register is
> updated asynchronously. The kernel checks the corresponding bits
> periodically.

What's the expected usage of this relative to prod, given that this has
to be chosen at boot time? When/where is this expected to be used
relative to prod mode?

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> index 18fce223b67b..3a7c5beb7096 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ static inline const void *__tag_set(const void *addr, u8 tag)
>  }
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS
> -#define arch_enable_tagging()			mte_enable_kernel()
> +#define arch_enable_tagging(mode)		mte_enable_kernel(mode)

Rather than passing a mode in, I think it'd be better to have:

* arch_enable_tagging_prod()
* arch_enable_tagging_light()

... that we can map in the arch code to separate:

* mte_enable_kernel_sync()
* mte_enable_kernel_async()

... as by construction that avoids calls with an unhandled mode, and we
wouldn't need the mode enum kasan_hw_tags_mode...

> +static inline int hw_init_mode(enum kasan_arg_mode mode)
> +{
> +	switch (mode) {
> +	case KASAN_ARG_MODE_LIGHT:
> +		return KASAN_HW_TAGS_ASYNC;
> +	default:
> +		return KASAN_HW_TAGS_SYNC;
> +	}
> +}

... and we can just have a wrapper like this to call either of the two functions directly, i.e.

static inline void hw_enable_tagging_mode(enum kasan_arg_mode mode)
{
	if (mode == KASAN_ARG_MODE_LIGHT)
		arch_enable_tagging_mode_light();
	else
		arch_enable_tagging_mode_prod();
}

Thanks,
Mark.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-15 15:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-15 12:00 [PATCH v3 0/4] arm64: ARMv8.5-A: MTE: Add async mode support Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 12:00 ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 12:00 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] kasan, arm64: Add KASAN light mode Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 12:00   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 15:08   ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2021-01-15 15:08     ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-16 13:47     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-16 13:47       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-16 14:09       ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-01-16 14:09         ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-01-18 10:24       ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-18 10:24         ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-15 18:59   ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-01-15 18:59     ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-01-16 13:40     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-16 13:40       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-16 13:59       ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-01-16 13:59         ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-01-16 14:06         ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-16 14:06           ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 12:00 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] arm64: mte: Add asynchronous mode support Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 12:00   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 15:13   ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-15 15:13     ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-16 13:49     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-16 13:49       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 12:00 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] arm64: mte: Enable async tag check fault Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 12:00   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 15:37   ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-15 15:37     ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-18 12:57   ` Catalin Marinas
2021-01-18 12:57     ` Catalin Marinas
2021-01-18 13:37     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-18 13:37       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-18 14:14       ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-18 14:14         ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-18 14:48         ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-18 14:48           ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-18 15:39           ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-18 15:39             ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-18 15:40       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-18 15:40         ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 12:00 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] arm64: mte: Optimize mte_assign_mem_tag_range() Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 12:00   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-15 15:45   ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-15 15:45     ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-16 14:22     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-16 14:22       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-17 12:27       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-17 12:27         ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-18 10:41         ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-18 10:41           ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-18 11:00           ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-01-18 11:00             ` Vincenzo Frascino

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210115150811.GA44111@C02TD0UTHF1T.local \
    --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=Branislav.Rankov@arm.com \
    --cc=andreyknvl@google.com \
    --cc=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=eugenis@google.com \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.