Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>,
	Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] arm64: Define Documentation/arm64/tagged-address-abi.txt
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 11:15:34 +0100
Message-ID: <141c740a-94c2-2243-b6d1-b44ffee43791@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190612153538.GL28951@C02TF0J2HF1T.local>

Hi Catalin,

On 12/06/2019 16:35, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Hi Vincenzo,
> 
> Some minor comments below but it looks fine to me overall. Cc'ing
> Szabolcs as well since I'd like a view from the libc people.
> 

Thanks for this, I saw Szabolcs comments.

> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 03:21:10PM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
>> diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/tagged-address-abi.txt b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-address-abi.txt
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..96e149e2c55c
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-address-abi.txt
>> @@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
>> +ARM64 TAGGED ADDRESS ABI
>> +========================
>> +
>> +This document describes the usage and semantics of the Tagged Address
>> +ABI on arm64.
>> +
>> +1. Introduction
>> +---------------
>> +
>> +On arm64 the TCR_EL1.TBI0 bit has been always enabled on the arm64 kernel,
>> +hence the userspace (EL0) is allowed to set a non-zero value in the top
> 
> I'd be clearer here: "userspace (EL0) is allowed to perform a user
> memory access through a 64-bit pointer with a non-zero top byte" (or
> something along the lines). Otherwise setting a non-zero top byte is
> allowed on any architecture, dereferencing it is a problem.
> 

Ok.

>> +byte but the resulting pointers are not allowed at the user-kernel syscall
>> +ABI boundary.
>> +
>> +This document describes a relaxation of the ABI with which it is possible
> 
> "relaxation of the ABI that makes it possible to..."
> 
>> +to pass tagged tagged pointers to the syscalls, when these pointers are in
>> +memory ranges obtained as described in paragraph 2.
> 
> "section 2" is better. There are a lot more paragraphs.
> 

Agree.

>> +
>> +Since it is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses
>> +into the kernel indiscriminately, arm64 provides a new sysctl interface
>> +(/proc/sys/abi/tagged_addr) that is used to prevent the applications from
>> +enabling the relaxed ABI and a new prctl() interface that can be used to
>> +enable or disable the relaxed ABI.
>> +
>> +The sysctl is meant also for testing purposes in order to provide a simple
>> +way for the userspace to verify the return error checking of the prctl()
>> +command without having to reconfigure the kernel.
>> +
>> +The ABI properties are inherited by threads of the same application and
>> +fork()'ed children but cleared when a new process is spawn (execve()).
> 
> "spawned".
> 
> I guess you could drop these three paragraphs here and mention the
> inheritance properties when introducing the prctl() below. You can also
> mention the global sysctl switch after the prctl() was introduced.
> 

I will move the last two (rewording them) to the _section_ 2, but I would still
prefer the Introduction to give an overview of the solution as well.

>> +
>> +2. ARM64 Tagged Address ABI
>> +---------------------------
>> +
>> +From the kernel syscall interface prospective, we define, for the purposes
>> +of this document, a "valid tagged pointer" as a pointer that either it has
> 
> "either has" (no 'it') sounds slightly better but I'm not a native
> English speaker either.
> 
>> +a zero value set in the top byte or it has a non-zero value, it is in memory
>> +ranges privately owned by a userspace process and it is obtained in one of
>> +the following ways:
>> +  - mmap() done by the process itself, where either:
>> +    * flags = MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS
>> +    * flags = MAP_PRIVATE and the file descriptor refers to a regular
>> +      file or "/dev/zero"
>> +  - a mapping below sbrk(0) done by the process itself
>> +  - any memory mapped by the kernel in the process's address space during
>> +    creation and following the restrictions presented above (i.e. data, bss,
>> +    stack).
>> +
>> +The ARM64 Tagged Address ABI is an opt-in feature, and an application can
>> +control it using the following prctl()s:
>> +  - PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL: can be used to enable the Tagged Address ABI.
> 
> enable or disable (not sure we need the latter but it doesn't heart).
> 
> I'd add the arg2 description here as well.
> 

Good point I missed this.

>> +  - PR_GET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL: can be used to check the status of the Tagged
>> +                             Address ABI.
>> +
>> +As a consequence of invoking PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL prctl() by an applications,
>> +the ABI guarantees the following behaviours:
>> +
>> +  - Every current or newly introduced syscall can accept any valid tagged
>> +    pointers.
>> +
>> +  - If a non valid tagged pointer is passed to a syscall then the behaviour
>> +    is undefined.
>> +
>> +  - Every valid tagged pointer is expected to work as an untagged one.
>> +
>> +  - The kernel preserves any valid tagged pointers and returns them to the
>> +    userspace unchanged in all the cases except the ones documented in the
>> +    "Preserving tags" paragraph of tagged-pointers.txt.
> 
> I'd think we need to qualify the context here in which the kernel
> preserves the tagged pointers. Did you mean on the syscall return?
> 

What this means is that on syscall return the tags are preserved, but if for
example you have tagged pointers inside siginfo_t, they will not because
according to tagged-pointers.txt non-zero tags are not preserved when delivering
signals.

>> +
>> +A definition of the meaning of tagged pointers on arm64 can be found in:
>> +Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt.
>> +
>> +3. ARM64 Tagged Address ABI Exceptions
>> +--------------------------------------
>> +
>> +The behaviours described in paragraph 2, with particular reference to the
> 
> "section 2"
> 
>> +acceptance by the syscalls of any valid tagged pointer are not applicable
>> +to the following cases:
>> +  - mmap() addr parameter.
>> +  - mremap() new_address parameter.
>> +  - prctl_set_mm() struct prctl_map fields.
>> +  - prctl_set_mm_map() struct prctl_map fields.
>> +
>> +4. Example of correct usage
>> +---------------------------
>> +
>> +void main(void)
>> +{
>> +	static int tbi_enabled = 0;
>> +	unsigned long tag = 0;
>> +
>> +	char *ptr = mmap(NULL, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
>> +			 MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
>> +
>> +	if (prctl(PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL, PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE,
>> +		  0, 0, 0) == 0)
>> +		tbi_enabled = 1;
>> +
>> +	if (!ptr)
>> +		return -1;
>> +
>> +	if (tbi_enabled)
>> +		tag = rand() & 0xff;
>> +
>> +	ptr = (char *)((unsigned long)ptr | (tag << TAG_SHIFT));
>> +
>> +	*ptr = 'a';
>> +
>> +	...
>> +}
>> +
>> -- 
>> 2.21.0
> 

-- 
Regards,
Vincenzo

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

  reply index

Thread overview: 78+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-12 11:43 [PATCH v17 00/15] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 01/15] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and __uaccess_mask_ptr Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:26   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 02/15] lib, arm64: untag user pointers in strn*_user Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:28   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 03/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:30   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-12 14:55   ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-13 11:02   ` Dave Martin
2019-06-13 15:26     ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-14  5:13       ` Kees Cook
2019-06-18  9:18         ` Dave Martin
2019-06-13 11:16   ` Dave Martin
2019-06-13 15:35     ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-13 15:45       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-13 15:57         ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-13 16:15           ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-17 13:56   ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-17 16:56     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2019-06-17 16:57     ` Evgenii Stepanov
2019-06-17 17:18       ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-17 21:59         ` Evgenii Stepanov
2019-06-19 14:45   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-19 15:29     ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 04/15] mm, arm64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:31   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-19 15:55   ` Khalid Aziz
2019-06-19 16:46     ` Khalid Aziz
2019-06-24 14:22       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 05/15] mm, arm64: untag user pointers in mm/gup.c Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:33   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-19 16:41   ` Khalid Aziz
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 06/15] mm, arm64: untag user pointers in get_vaddr_frames Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:34   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-19 16:48   ` Khalid Aziz
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 07/15] fs, arm64: untag user pointers in copy_mount_options Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:35   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-19 20:01   ` Khalid Aziz
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 08/15] userfaultfd, arm64: untag user pointers Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:40   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 09/15] drm/amdgpu, " Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 10/15] drm/radeon, arm64: untag user pointers in radeon_gem_userptr_ioctl Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 11/15] IB/mlx4, arm64: untag user pointers in mlx4_get_umem_mr Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 12/15] media/v4l2-core, arm64: untag user pointers in videobuf_dma_contig_user_get Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-19 20:05   ` Khalid Aziz
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 13/15] tee/shm, arm64: untag user pointers in tee_shm_register Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 14/15] vfio/type1, arm64: untag user pointers in vaddr_get_pfn Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:41   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-12 15:58   ` Auger Eric
2019-06-12 11:43 ` [PATCH v17 15/15] selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 12:30   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2019-06-12 15:00     ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-19 14:42       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-06-12 14:21 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] arm64 relaxed ABI Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-12 14:21   ` [PATCH v4 1/2] arm64: Define Documentation/arm64/tagged-address-abi.txt Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-12 15:35     ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-13 10:15       ` Vincenzo Frascino [this message]
2019-06-13 11:37         ` Dave Martin
2019-06-13 12:28           ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-13 13:23             ` Dave Martin
2019-06-13 15:39               ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-12 16:30     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2019-06-13  9:20       ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-13 10:14         ` Szabolcs Nagy
2019-06-13 11:16           ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-13 12:28             ` Szabolcs Nagy
2019-06-13 14:03               ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-13 15:32                 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2019-06-13 15:35                   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-12 14:21   ` [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: Relax Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-12 15:56     ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-12 16:37     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2019-06-13 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 0/2] arm64 relaxed ABI Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-13 15:51   ` [PATCH v5 1/2] arm64: Define Documentation/arm64/tagged-address-abi.txt Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-18 11:02     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2019-06-18 13:13     ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-06-21 15:16       ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-13 15:51   ` [PATCH v5 2/2] arm64: Relax Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt Vincenzo Frascino

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=141c740a-94c2-2243-b6d1-b44ffee43791@arm.com \
    --to=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
    --cc=andreyknvl@google.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=szabolcs.nagy@arm.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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

Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/0 linux-arm-kernel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/1 linux-arm-kernel/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-arm-kernel linux-arm-kernel/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel \
		linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org infradead-linux-arm-kernel@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-arm-kernel


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox