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_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable 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 791DDC282DD for ; Thu, 23 May 2019 15:44:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C8032175B for ; Thu, 23 May 2019 15:44:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="tQpTlDs3"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="aFH35CN6" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4C8032175B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From: In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=9B4wUCKCJfBRHoJsXOC/hbDCbwX3h9x20R10CKDv+qo=; b=tQpTlDs3DjJ/kq btMePUa+FLTkZ84yhe+7JkaZsZgdw6K2SigkpdaJNySzom6UGfWaxj0J56QeMszq88qRiEXxY7YaN AqZqtzxxIs8tvwFDqqHzhR4nDQmX7zrS9RsHKbT7UbXo3KZBR6hM3Dk94PN28U94Pjxqc7cRQbDhp qlBio+44EB+PiX6zvNQg7/XJR0z+ZIaGZQLBr6autAK7TKcCWavGSSLMGxj5xkYYhaZMPWsH4Upj+ +Tl04pMIUiuKoXX8bXUvkCBLQ06A7uWZXdz6bmMm9cKQmlz04+nlLRKUqvV3uyTgxE6//4SoRMfOl JaMJkeKweUf2zohDmblw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hTptQ-0004JN-Gw; Thu, 23 May 2019 15:44:32 +0000 Received: from mail-lj1-x243.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::243]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hTptN-0004Hq-Iz for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 23 May 2019 15:44:31 +0000 Received: by mail-lj1-x243.google.com with SMTP id z5so5914476lji.10 for ; Thu, 23 May 2019 08:44:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/wji4Ea/4BKbtz1pB+NomkucTVNmeP5sWS4Z09Qoh/0=; b=aFH35CN6oPRsy0HINPVyUyCLmmZ1q+W5tanGOLFB9ZDOu6iaE0T6Zf2p50/YpwHsbr 48EE1NUmchXldef87VmFcBOfomkIHiEfKDLilaRqMK87cFmewn3SJqhTI1TRHWczozD4 oXQnG40alYiwUIlV5zhAeNCFOXlq3pqE0BbnZ0FvRVuwBWMRV9wfu1H9fYBPCAdnSv5U HVNKv9dUz6r+VmwUQYwzrC3kRsKz62p+YOIjrLW4bC1aoOEaVaZZBPmIi8QCc4AHmXYb 1tLTls+6tcRQac2V8FPQbYxeEAGXeJISVC1rVB3y4LA5KetGIABPN8JvrlKNXRYKDzkN FlXA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/wji4Ea/4BKbtz1pB+NomkucTVNmeP5sWS4Z09Qoh/0=; b=fUV/6i2Wox1g3tPPpC0RiFAtYe/BfhmIYxAWQ75QhWHVGPjwViv15Y1Fs8xffpmrDG P3ouIQvr0wwVM5msih3iTwa+b5BmmdBfpHm7W9Z8mFG5zGUE8kcgxdxzwAQGOb8lrn7D pGa7byCTFCm8PrLliigoORF/ZfCh+qRKHb+M6xm3MDcKAq7b+S0xod7xaNG+ZmRvY/hQ /qehBR4Gent9EujBDqjHsK5/HGweX6pbhBKZMPDJHMkrx2ZT7eOI7GChewWEo1Dqb68X 2csDoKkq9aR7m2Aj4qMuNQi88xTCnu2mQbaSgVBgDrW3zvmF21A2UHfXPAcOaxm0YPeE NLuA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWyYJfeiH7cfqL3qZDZUxLfb3Pn2adN1w2YMLsUjWqxHZvsGcEz VWvlp+04xZ6d1MtpiLF84fyZOAs/VXC5DOjGM8l81w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzhSDjrNWAy5KyNhMUlv7cjkwlGbRwsa6Uqsf4zqqYvI69PmEIAwS9JjP+IZnW+JBpTZSKDycdIF2QLVLgBgoM= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9d4e:: with SMTP id y14mr23518941ljj.199.1558626264355; Thu, 23 May 2019 08:44:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190517144931.GA56186@arrakis.emea.arm.com> <20190521182932.sm4vxweuwo5ermyd@mbp> <201905211633.6C0BF0C2@keescook> <20190522101110.m2stmpaj7seezveq@mbp> <20190522163527.rnnc6t4tll7tk5zw@mbp> <201905221316.865581CF@keescook> <20190523144449.waam2mkyzhjpqpur@mbp> In-Reply-To: <20190523144449.waam2mkyzhjpqpur@mbp> From: enh Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 08:44:12 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel To: Catalin Marinas X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190523_084429_682512_CF5E7762 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 41.22 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Szabolcs Nagy , Will Deacon , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Linux Memory Management List , Khalid Aziz , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Vincenzo Frascino , Jacob Bramley , Leon Romanovsky , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Dmitry Vyukov , Dave Martin , Evgenii Stepanov , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Kevin Brodsky , Kees Cook , Ruben Ayrapetyan , Andrey Konovalov , Ramana Radhakrishnan , Alex Williamson , Yishai Hadas , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linux ARM , Kostya Serebryany , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Felix Kuehling , LKML , Jens Wiklander , Lee Smith , Alexander Deucher , Andrew Morton , Robin Murphy , Christian Koenig , Luc Van Oostenryck Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 7:45 AM Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 01:47:36PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 05:35:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > The two hard requirements I have for supporting any new hardware feature > > > in Linux are (1) a single kernel image binary continues to run on old > > > hardware while making use of the new feature if available and (2) old > > > user space continues to run on new hardware while new user space can > > > take advantage of the new feature. > > > > Agreed! And I think the series meets these requirements, yes? > > Yes. I mentioned this just to make sure people don't expect different > kernel builds for different hardware features. > > There is also the obvious requirement which I didn't mention: new user > space continues to run on new/subsequent kernel versions. That's one of > the points of contention for this series (ignoring MTE) with the > maintainers having to guarantee this without much effort. IOW, do the > 500K+ new lines in a subsequent kernel version break any user space out > there? I'm only talking about the relaxed TBI ABI. Are the usual LTP, > syskaller sufficient? Better static analysis would definitely help. > > > > For MTE, we just can't enable it by default since there are applications > > > who use the top byte of a pointer and expect it to be ignored rather > > > than failing with a mismatched tag. Just think of a hwasan compiled > > > binary where TBI is expected to work and you try to run it with MTE > > > turned on. > > > > Ah! Okay, here's the use-case I wasn't thinking of: the concern is TBI > > conflicting with MTE. And anything that starts using TBI suddenly can't > > run in the future because it's being interpreted as MTE bits? (Is that > > the ABI concern? > > That's another aspect to figure out when we add the MTE support. I don't > think we'd be able to do this without an explicit opt-in by the user. > > Or, if we ever want MTE to be turned on by default (i.e. tag checking), > even if everything is tagged with 0, we have to disallow TBI for user > and this includes hwasan. There were a small number of programs using > the TBI (I think some JavaScript compilers tried this). But now we are > bringing in the hwasan support and this can be a large user base. Shall > we add an ELF note for such binaries that use TBI/hwasan? > > This series is still required for MTE but we may decide not to relax the > ABI blindly, therefore the opt-in (prctl) or personality idea. > > > I feel like we got into the weeds about ioctl()s and one-off bugs...) > > This needs solving as well. Most driver developers won't know why > untagged_addr() is needed unless we have more rigorous types or type > annotations and a tool to check them (we should probably revive the old > sparse thread). > > > So there needs to be some way to let the kernel know which of three > > things it should be doing: > > 1- leaving userspace addresses as-is (present) > > 2- wiping the top bits before using (this series) > > (I'd say tolerating rather than wiping since get_user still uses the tag > in the current series) > > The current series does not allow any choice between 1 and 2, the > default ABI basically becomes option 2. > > > 3- wiping the top bits for most things, but retaining them for MTE as > > needed (the future) > > 2 and 3 are not entirely compatible as a tagged pointer may be checked > against the memory colour by the hardware. So you can't have hwasan > binary with MTE enabled. > > > I expect MTE to be the "default" in the future. Once a system's libc has > > grown support for it, everything will be trying to use MTE. TBI will be > > the special case (but TBI is effectively a prerequisite). > > The kernel handling of tagged pointers is indeed a prerequisite. The ABI > distinction between the above 2 and 3 needs to be solved. > > > AFAICT, the only difference I see between 2 and 3 will be the tag handling > > in usercopy (all other places will continue to ignore the top bits). Is > > that accurate? > > Yes, mostly (for the kernel). If MTE is enabled by default for a hwasan > binary, it will SEGFAULT (either in user space or in kernel uaccess). > How does the kernel choose between 2 and 3? > > > Is "1" a per-process state we want to keep? (I assume not, but rather it > > is available via no TBI/MTE CONFIG or a boot-time option, if at all?) > > Possibly, though not necessarily per process. For testing or if > something goes wrong during boot, a command line option with a static > label would do. The AT_FLAGS bit needs to be checked by user space. My > preference would be per-process. > > > To choose between "2" and "3", it seems we need a per-process flag to > > opt into TBI (and out of MTE). > > Or leave option 2 the default and get it to opt in to MTE. > > > For userspace, how would a future binary choose TBI over MTE? If it's > > a library issue, we can't use an ELF bit, since the choice may be > > "late" after ELF load (this implies the need for a prctl().) If it's > > binary-only ("built with HWKASan") then an ELF bit seems sufficient. > > And without the marking, I'd expect the kernel to enforce MTE when > > there are high bits. > > The current plan is that a future binary issues a prctl(), after > checking the HWCAP_MTE bit (as I replied to Elliot, the MTE instructions > are not in the current NOP space). I'd expect this to be done by the > libc or dynamic loader under the assumption that the binaries it loads > do _not_ use the top pointer byte for anything else. yeah, it sounds like to support hwasan and MTE, the dynamic linker will need to not use either itself. > With hwasan > compiled objects this gets more confusing (any ELF note to identify > them?). no, at the moment code that wants to know checks for the presence of __hwasan_init. (and bionic doesn't actually look at any ELF notes right now.) but we can always add something if we need to. > (there is also the risk of existing applications using TBI already but > I'm not aware of any still using this feature other than hwasan) > > -- > Catalin _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel