From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 138FEC04EB8 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 00:01:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDCF6214DB for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 00:01:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="F9ixb6J3" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BDCF6214DB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726665AbeLEABt (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2018 19:01:49 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f44.google.com ([209.85.221.44]:37694 "EHLO mail-wr1-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725875AbeLEABt (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2018 19:01:49 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f44.google.com with SMTP id j10so17779198wru.4; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 16:01:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=BdKhANV4u4dEOeBOj+7RjLxEQxQR3v34rvUj0vf3onI=; b=F9ixb6J3B1rm4Smj7F6hP7n+3DHjB8vxeFEENOg2Y94vDfqkWeGtJfKvgabD4QMAkc g/TS+0fO0sB6QWDJ6Z9ljV86lTIvb8BvAgDfgQDFO8NW75TANqAsyHkMLXpojPAEKdDm qC8MXlrBJ/VM4nWjfBabEFcMar2qj2BgGjOdrK2Ryy4AwcPFibvxM7NgIYsq0A+BuKRt 4vseSM/VhdJXfptRuJUPoqcHI7N4gI02qwxfpeVE7PU8v656tjNlc5592QNO83i4B4q5 Pl/uRUso+Fro68tIERLsg/xOlfvpNbDop8lPS9yAdocoPUMWoZz55HqNEFQoif/3iWn4 WXMw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=BdKhANV4u4dEOeBOj+7RjLxEQxQR3v34rvUj0vf3onI=; b=PpvHOs+1yr62aDp0QpHvWy23MDcUMWKVjSvhS7g7Z2zPV2+tLVrRMJOiFnlLdGzEaR zHuoqQ/ImI+rTEzkaHTW5PUg9o29gtxDmoFEaybF9W0szJYbal2YVSX1TGInrjnoDMi9 NmuFpbpJcMqoOJzbnfyZGTq6WJT5eX1LoN+81VnCdZHn/F7x5iVZqTantSxT6M/uw3ye sUeBgUIfazEa3sjs9/T+gB6fMEtgT5an3ZHomoNzQunWHqbtdvE+2Zqofe1Z4d8JRaax o9vHL1QZQlxpK07vv4oLsHJeuGyXgdWKJ73vgqVVV10coTBSm8UaaQxSBTNyZj+1WcuZ 5uLA== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbbQyk8pqsFScyGNI7+l0nfvDNBO45AqC575ZaMKXWerjA9Hbm4 vWukadZ7oG7lSmK4A40OrRM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/WEfdkdQrpd6AUIJ1K1MaggQMtohB3+nOWPL+DwDlZaMJTndn3b0mPBkJEMQccxVPA2GfH5MA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e9d1:: with SMTP id l17mr18510352wrn.73.1543968105924; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 16:01:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.2.19.70] ([208.91.2.1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o17sm8360708wmg.35.2018.12.04.16.01.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Dec 2018 16:01:45 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.1 \(3445.101.1\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vmalloc: New flag for flush before releasing pages From: Nadav Amit In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 16:01:38 -0800 Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "daniel@iogearbox.net" , "ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org" , "jeyu@kernel.org" , "rostedt@goodmis.org" , "ast@kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "Dock, Deneen T" , "jannh@google.com" , "kristen@linux.intel.com" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "will.deacon@arm.com" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "luto@kernel.org" , "Keshavamurthy, Anil S" , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , "mhiramat@kernel.org" , "naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "Hansen, Dave" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <843E4326-3426-4AEC-B0F7-2DC398A6E59A@gmail.com> References: <20181128000754.18056-1-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> <20181128000754.18056-2-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> <4883FED1-D0EC-41B0-A90F-1A697756D41D@gmail.com> <20181204160304.GB7195@arm.com> <51281e69a3722014f718a6840f43b2e6773eed90.camel@intel.com> To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.101.1) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Dec 4, 2018, at 3:51 PM, Edgecombe, Rick P = wrote: >=20 > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 12:36 -0800, Nadav Amit wrote: >>> On Dec 4, 2018, at 12:02 PM, Edgecombe, Rick P = >>> wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 16:03 +0000, Will Deacon wrote: >>>> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 05:43:11PM -0800, Nadav Amit wrote: >>>>>> On Nov 27, 2018, at 4:07 PM, Rick Edgecombe < >>>>>> rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Since vfree will lazily flush the TLB, but not lazily free the >>>>>> underlying >>>>>> pages, >>>>>> it often leaves stale TLB entries to freed pages that could get = re- >>>>>> used. >>>>>> This is >>>>>> undesirable for cases where the memory being freed has special >>>>>> permissions >>>>>> such >>>>>> as executable. >>>>>=20 >>>>> So I am trying to finish my patch-set for preventing transient W+X >>>>> mappings >>>>> from taking space, by handling kprobes & ftrace that I missed = (thanks >>>>> again >>>>> for >>>>> pointing it out). >>>>>=20 >>>>> But all of the sudden, I don=E2=80=99t understand why we have the = problem that >>>>> this >>>>> (your) patch-set deals with at all. We already change the mappings = to >>>>> make >>>>> the memory writable before freeing the memory, so why can=E2=80=99t = we make it >>>>> non-executable at the same time? Actually, why do we make the = module >>>>> memory, >>>>> including its data executable before freeing it??? >>>>=20 >>>> Yeah, this is really confusing, but I have a suspicion it's a = combination >>>> of the various different configurations and hysterical raisins. We = can't >>>> rely on module_alloc() allocating from the vmalloc area (see nios2) = nor >>>> can we rely on disable_ro_nx() being available at build time. >>>>=20 >>>> If we *could* rely on module allocations always using vmalloc(), = then >>>> we could pass in Rick's new flag and drop disable_ro_nx() = altogether >>>> afaict -- who cares about the memory attributes of a mapping that's = about >>>> to disappear anyway? >>>>=20 >>>> Is it just nios2 that does something different? >>>>=20 >>>> Will >>>=20 >>> Yea it is really intertwined. I think for x86, set_memory_nx = everywhere >>> would >>> solve it as well, in fact that was what I first thought the solution = should >>> be >>> until this was suggested. It's interesting that from the other = thread Masami >>> Hiramatsu referenced, set_memory_nx was suggested last year and = would have >>> inadvertently blocked this on x86. But, on the other architectures I = have >>> since >>> learned it is a bit different. >>>=20 >>> It looks like actually most arch's don't re-define set_memory_*, and = so all >>> of >>> the frob_* functions are actually just noops. In which case = allocating RWX >>> is >>> needed to make it work at all, because that is what the allocation = is going >>> to >>> stay at. So in these archs, set_memory_nx won't solve it because it = will do >>> nothing. >>>=20 >>> On x86 I think you cannot get rid of disable_ro_nx fully because = there is >>> the >>> changing of the permissions on the directmap as well. You don't want = some >>> other >>> caller getting a page that was left RO when freed and then trying to = write >>> to >>> it, if I understand this. >>>=20 >>> The other reasoning was that calling set_memory_nx isn't doing what = we are >>> actually trying to do which is prevent the pages from getting = released too >>> early. >>>=20 >>> A more clear solution for all of this might involve refactoring some = of the >>> set_memory_ de-allocation logic out into __weak functions in either = modules >>> or >>> vmalloc. As Jessica points out in the other thread though, modules = does a >>> lot >>> more stuff there than the other module_alloc callers. I think it may = take >>> some >>> thought to centralize AND make it optimal for every >>> module_alloc/vmalloc_exec >>> user and arch. >>>=20 >>> But for now with the change in vmalloc, we can block the executable = mapping >>> freed page re-use issue in a cross platform way. >>=20 >> Please understand me correctly - I didn=E2=80=99t mean that your = patches are not >> needed. > Ok, I think I understand. I have been pondering these same things = after Masami > Hiramatsu's comments on this thread the other day. >=20 >> All I did is asking - how come the PTEs are executable when they are = cleared >> they are executable, when in fact we manipulate them when the module = is >> removed. > I think the directmap used to be RWX so maybe historically its trying = to return > it to its default state? Not sure. >=20 >> I think I try to deal with a similar problem to the one you encounter = - >> broken W^X. The only thing that bothered me in regard to your patches = (and >> only after I played with the code) is that there is still a = time-window in >> which W^X is broken due to disable_ro_nx(). > Totally agree there is overlap in the fixes and we should sync. >=20 > What do you think about Andy's suggestion for doing the vfree cleanup = in vmalloc > with arch hooks? So the allocation goes into vfree fully setup and = vmalloc frees > it and on x86 resets the direct map. As long as you do it, I have no problem ;-) You would need to consider all the callers of module_memfree(), and = probably to untangle at least part of the mess in pageattr.c . If you are up to = it, just say so, and I=E2=80=99ll drop this patch. All I can say is =E2=80=9Cg= ood luck with all that=E2=80=9D. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nadav Amit Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vmalloc: New flag for flush before releasing pages Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 16:01:38 -0800 Message-ID: <843E4326-3426-4AEC-B0F7-2DC398A6E59A@gmail.com> References: <20181128000754.18056-1-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> <20181128000754.18056-2-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> <4883FED1-D0EC-41B0-A90F-1A697756D41D@gmail.com> <20181204160304.GB7195@arm.com> <51281e69a3722014f718a6840f43b2e6773eed90.camel@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.1 \(3445.101.1\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "daniel@iogearbox.net" , "ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org" , "jeyu@kernel.org" , "rostedt@goodmis.org" , "ast@kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "Dock, Deneen T" , "jannh@google.com" , "kristen@linux.intel.com" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "will.deacon@arm.com" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "luto@kernel.org" , "Keshavamurthy, Anil S" , "kernel-hardening@list To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org > On Dec 4, 2018, at 3:51 PM, Edgecombe, Rick P = wrote: >=20 > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 12:36 -0800, Nadav Amit wrote: >>> On Dec 4, 2018, at 12:02 PM, Edgecombe, Rick P = >>> wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 16:03 +0000, Will Deacon wrote: >>>> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 05:43:11PM -0800, Nadav Amit wrote: >>>>>> On Nov 27, 2018, at 4:07 PM, Rick Edgecombe < >>>>>> rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Since vfree will lazily flush the TLB, but not lazily free the >>>>>> underlying >>>>>> pages, >>>>>> it often leaves stale TLB entries to freed pages that could get = re- >>>>>> used. >>>>>> This is >>>>>> undesirable for cases where the memory being freed has special >>>>>> permissions >>>>>> such >>>>>> as executable. >>>>>=20 >>>>> So I am trying to finish my patch-set for preventing transient W+X >>>>> mappings >>>>> from taking space, by handling kprobes & ftrace that I missed = (thanks >>>>> again >>>>> for >>>>> pointing it out). >>>>>=20 >>>>> But all of the sudden, I don=E2=80=99t understand why we have the = problem that >>>>> this >>>>> (your) patch-set deals with at all. We already change the mappings = to >>>>> make >>>>> the memory writable before freeing the memory, so why can=E2=80=99t = we make it >>>>> non-executable at the same time? Actually, why do we make the = module >>>>> memory, >>>>> including its data executable before freeing it??? >>>>=20 >>>> Yeah, this is really confusing, but I have a suspicion it's a = combination >>>> of the various different configurations and hysterical raisins. We = can't >>>> rely on module_alloc() allocating from the vmalloc area (see nios2) = nor >>>> can we rely on disable_ro_nx() being available at build time. >>>>=20 >>>> If we *could* rely on module allocations always using vmalloc(), = then >>>> we could pass in Rick's new flag and drop disable_ro_nx() = altogether >>>> afaict -- who cares about the memory attributes of a mapping that's = about >>>> to disappear anyway? >>>>=20 >>>> Is it just nios2 that does something different? >>>>=20 >>>> Will >>>=20 >>> Yea it is really intertwined. I think for x86, set_memory_nx = everywhere >>> would >>> solve it as well, in fact that was what I first thought the solution = should >>> be >>> until this was suggested. It's interesting that from the other = thread Masami >>> Hiramatsu referenced, set_memory_nx was suggested last year and = would have >>> inadvertently blocked this on x86. But, on the other architectures I = have >>> since >>> learned it is a bit different. >>>=20 >>> It looks like actually most arch's don't re-define set_memory_*, and = so all >>> of >>> the frob_* functions are actually just noops. In which case = allocating RWX >>> is >>> needed to make it work at all, because that is what the allocation = is going >>> to >>> stay at. So in these archs, set_memory_nx won't solve it because it = will do >>> nothing. >>>=20 >>> On x86 I think you cannot get rid of disable_ro_nx fully because = there is >>> the >>> changing of the permissions on the directmap as well. You don't want = some >>> other >>> caller getting a page that was left RO when freed and then trying to = write >>> to >>> it, if I understand this. >>>=20 >>> The other reasoning was that calling set_memory_nx isn't doing what = we are >>> actually trying to do which is prevent the pages from getting = released too >>> early. >>>=20 >>> A more clear solution for all of this might involve refactoring some = of the >>> set_memory_ de-allocation logic out into __weak functions in either = modules >>> or >>> vmalloc. As Jessica points out in the other thread though, modules = does a >>> lot >>> more stuff there than the other module_alloc callers. I think it may = take >>> some >>> thought to centralize AND make it optimal for every >>> module_alloc/vmalloc_exec >>> user and arch. >>>=20 >>> But for now with the change in vmalloc, we can block the executable = mapping >>> freed page re-use issue in a cross platform way. >>=20 >> Please understand me correctly - I didn=E2=80=99t mean that your = patches are not >> needed. > Ok, I think I understand. I have been pondering these same things = after Masami > Hiramatsu's comments on this thread the other day. >=20 >> All I did is asking - how come the PTEs are executable when they are = cleared >> they are executable, when in fact we manipulate them when the module = is >> removed. > I think the directmap used to be RWX so maybe historically its trying = to return > it to its default state? Not sure. >=20 >> I think I try to deal with a similar problem to the one you encounter = - >> broken W^X. The only thing that bothered me in regard to your patches = (and >> only after I played with the code) is that there is still a = time-window in >> which W^X is broken due to disable_ro_nx(). > Totally agree there is overlap in the fixes and we should sync. >=20 > What do you think about Andy's suggestion for doing the vfree cleanup = in vmalloc > with arch hooks? So the allocation goes into vfree fully setup and = vmalloc frees > it and on x86 resets the direct map. As long as you do it, I have no problem ;-) You would need to consider all the callers of module_memfree(), and = probably to untangle at least part of the mess in pageattr.c . If you are up to = it, just say so, and I=E2=80=99ll drop this patch. All I can say is =E2=80=9Cg= ood luck with all that=E2=80=9D. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-f69.google.com (mail-wr1-f69.google.com [209.85.221.69]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 282126B716C for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 19:01:48 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wr1-f69.google.com with SMTP id q7so13841360wrw.8 for ; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 16:01:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-sor-f41.google.com (mail-sor-f41.google.com. [209.85.220.41]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id o4sor6398306wrj.2.2018.12.04.16.01.46 for (Google Transport Security); Tue, 04 Dec 2018 16:01:46 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.1 \(3445.101.1\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vmalloc: New flag for flush before releasing pages From: Nadav Amit In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 16:01:38 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <843E4326-3426-4AEC-B0F7-2DC398A6E59A@gmail.com> References: <20181128000754.18056-1-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> <20181128000754.18056-2-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> <4883FED1-D0EC-41B0-A90F-1A697756D41D@gmail.com> <20181204160304.GB7195@arm.com> <51281e69a3722014f718a6840f43b2e6773eed90.camel@intel.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "daniel@iogearbox.net" , "ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org" , "jeyu@kernel.org" , "rostedt@goodmis.org" , "ast@kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "Dock, Deneen T" , "jannh@google.com" , "kristen@linux.intel.com" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "will.deacon@arm.com" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "luto@kernel.org" , "Keshavamurthy, Anil S" , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , "mhiramat@kernel.org" , "naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "Hansen, Dave" > On Dec 4, 2018, at 3:51 PM, Edgecombe, Rick P = wrote: >=20 > On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 12:36 -0800, Nadav Amit wrote: >>> On Dec 4, 2018, at 12:02 PM, Edgecombe, Rick P = >>> wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 16:03 +0000, Will Deacon wrote: >>>> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 05:43:11PM -0800, Nadav Amit wrote: >>>>>> On Nov 27, 2018, at 4:07 PM, Rick Edgecombe < >>>>>> rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Since vfree will lazily flush the TLB, but not lazily free the >>>>>> underlying >>>>>> pages, >>>>>> it often leaves stale TLB entries to freed pages that could get = re- >>>>>> used. >>>>>> This is >>>>>> undesirable for cases where the memory being freed has special >>>>>> permissions >>>>>> such >>>>>> as executable. >>>>>=20 >>>>> So I am trying to finish my patch-set for preventing transient W+X >>>>> mappings >>>>> from taking space, by handling kprobes & ftrace that I missed = (thanks >>>>> again >>>>> for >>>>> pointing it out). >>>>>=20 >>>>> But all of the sudden, I don=E2=80=99t understand why we have the = problem that >>>>> this >>>>> (your) patch-set deals with at all. We already change the mappings = to >>>>> make >>>>> the memory writable before freeing the memory, so why can=E2=80=99t = we make it >>>>> non-executable at the same time? Actually, why do we make the = module >>>>> memory, >>>>> including its data executable before freeing it??? >>>>=20 >>>> Yeah, this is really confusing, but I have a suspicion it's a = combination >>>> of the various different configurations and hysterical raisins. We = can't >>>> rely on module_alloc() allocating from the vmalloc area (see nios2) = nor >>>> can we rely on disable_ro_nx() being available at build time. >>>>=20 >>>> If we *could* rely on module allocations always using vmalloc(), = then >>>> we could pass in Rick's new flag and drop disable_ro_nx() = altogether >>>> afaict -- who cares about the memory attributes of a mapping that's = about >>>> to disappear anyway? >>>>=20 >>>> Is it just nios2 that does something different? >>>>=20 >>>> Will >>>=20 >>> Yea it is really intertwined. I think for x86, set_memory_nx = everywhere >>> would >>> solve it as well, in fact that was what I first thought the solution = should >>> be >>> until this was suggested. It's interesting that from the other = thread Masami >>> Hiramatsu referenced, set_memory_nx was suggested last year and = would have >>> inadvertently blocked this on x86. But, on the other architectures I = have >>> since >>> learned it is a bit different. >>>=20 >>> It looks like actually most arch's don't re-define set_memory_*, and = so all >>> of >>> the frob_* functions are actually just noops. In which case = allocating RWX >>> is >>> needed to make it work at all, because that is what the allocation = is going >>> to >>> stay at. So in these archs, set_memory_nx won't solve it because it = will do >>> nothing. >>>=20 >>> On x86 I think you cannot get rid of disable_ro_nx fully because = there is >>> the >>> changing of the permissions on the directmap as well. You don't want = some >>> other >>> caller getting a page that was left RO when freed and then trying to = write >>> to >>> it, if I understand this. >>>=20 >>> The other reasoning was that calling set_memory_nx isn't doing what = we are >>> actually trying to do which is prevent the pages from getting = released too >>> early. >>>=20 >>> A more clear solution for all of this might involve refactoring some = of the >>> set_memory_ de-allocation logic out into __weak functions in either = modules >>> or >>> vmalloc. As Jessica points out in the other thread though, modules = does a >>> lot >>> more stuff there than the other module_alloc callers. I think it may = take >>> some >>> thought to centralize AND make it optimal for every >>> module_alloc/vmalloc_exec >>> user and arch. >>>=20 >>> But for now with the change in vmalloc, we can block the executable = mapping >>> freed page re-use issue in a cross platform way. >>=20 >> Please understand me correctly - I didn=E2=80=99t mean that your = patches are not >> needed. > Ok, I think I understand. I have been pondering these same things = after Masami > Hiramatsu's comments on this thread the other day. >=20 >> All I did is asking - how come the PTEs are executable when they are = cleared >> they are executable, when in fact we manipulate them when the module = is >> removed. > I think the directmap used to be RWX so maybe historically its trying = to return > it to its default state? Not sure. >=20 >> I think I try to deal with a similar problem to the one you encounter = - >> broken W^X. The only thing that bothered me in regard to your patches = (and >> only after I played with the code) is that there is still a = time-window in >> which W^X is broken due to disable_ro_nx(). > Totally agree there is overlap in the fixes and we should sync. >=20 > What do you think about Andy's suggestion for doing the vfree cleanup = in vmalloc > with arch hooks? So the allocation goes into vfree fully setup and = vmalloc frees > it and on x86 resets the direct map. As long as you do it, I have no problem ;-) You would need to consider all the callers of module_memfree(), and = probably to untangle at least part of the mess in pageattr.c . If you are up to = it, just say so, and I=E2=80=99ll drop this patch. All I can say is =E2=80=9Cg= ood luck with all that=E2=80=9D.