From: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Alexander Potapenko" <glider@google.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
"Andrey Konovalov" <andreyknvl@google.com>,
"Andrey Ryabinin" <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@kernel.org>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
"Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Christoph Lameter" <cl@linux.com>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"David Rientjes" <rientjes@google.com>,
"Dmitry Vyukov" <dvyukov@google.com>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Hillf Danton" <hdanton@sina.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Jonathan Cameron" <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
"Joonsoo Kim" <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
"Jörn Engel" <joern@purestorage.com>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"Pekka Enberg" <penberg@kernel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"SeongJae Park" <sjpark@amazon.com>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
"kernel list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
"Linux ARM" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/9] x86, kfence: enable KFENCE for x86
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 16:22:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAG48ez1=uad2yMeffArw7Nem3Hea3pnL9rqAFsB7fFzBd+4Hcw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNNBoiL2=JDD=vC5dB_TPW1Ybe5k7SqqhvUE2B7GmzRLyg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 2:00 PM Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 at 03:49, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 2:17 PM Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
> > > Add architecture specific implementation details for KFENCE and enable
> > > KFENCE for the x86 architecture. In particular, this implements the
> > > required interface in <asm/kfence.h> for setting up the pool and
> > > providing helper functions for protecting and unprotecting pages.
> > >
> > > For x86, we need to ensure that the pool uses 4K pages, which is done
> > > using the set_memory_4k() helper function.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
> > > Co-developed-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
> > [...]
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > [...]
> > > @@ -725,6 +726,9 @@ no_context(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code,
> > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI))
> > > efi_recover_from_page_fault(address);
> > >
> > > + if (kfence_handle_page_fault(address))
> > > + return;
[...]
> > Unrelated sidenote: Since we're hooking after exception fixup
> > handling, the debug-only KFENCE_STRESS_TEST_FAULTS can probably still
> > cause some behavioral differences through spurious faults in places
> > like copy_user_enhanced_fast_string (where the exception table entries
> > are used even if the *kernel* pointer, not the user pointer, causes a
> > fault). But since KFENCE_STRESS_TEST_FAULTS is exclusively for KFENCE
> > development, the difference might not matter. And ordering them the
> > other way around definitely isn't possible, because the kernel relies
> > on being able to fixup OOB reads. So there probably isn't really
> > anything we can do better here; it's just something to keep in mind.
> > Maybe you can add a little warning to the help text for that Kconfig
> > entry that warns people about this?
>
> Thanks for pointing it out, but that option really is *only* to stress
> kfence with concurrent allocations/frees/page faults. If anybody
> enables this option for anything other than testing kfence, it's their
> own fault. ;-)
Sounds fair. :P
> I'll try to add a generic note to the Kconfig entry, but what you
> mention here seems quite x86-specific.
(FWIW, I think it could currently also happen on arm64 in the rare
cases where KERNEL_DS is used. But luckily Christoph Hellwig has
already gotten rid of most places that did that.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-30 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-29 13:16 [PATCH v6 0/9] KFENCE: A low-overhead sampling-based memory safety error detector Marco Elver
2020-10-29 13:16 ` [PATCH v6 1/9] mm: add Kernel Electric-Fence infrastructure Marco Elver
2020-10-30 2:49 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-30 19:16 ` Marco Elver
2020-10-29 13:16 ` [PATCH v6 2/9] x86, kfence: enable KFENCE for x86 Marco Elver
2020-10-30 2:49 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-30 13:00 ` Marco Elver
2020-10-30 15:22 ` Jann Horn [this message]
2020-10-29 13:16 ` [PATCH v6 3/9] arm64, kfence: enable KFENCE for ARM64 Marco Elver
2020-10-30 2:49 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-30 16:00 ` Mark Rutland
2020-10-30 15:47 ` Mark Rutland
2020-10-30 15:54 ` Marco Elver
2020-10-29 13:16 ` [PATCH v6 4/9] mm, kfence: insert KFENCE hooks for SLAB Marco Elver
2020-10-30 2:49 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-30 15:41 ` Marco Elver
2020-10-29 13:16 ` [PATCH v6 5/9] mm, kfence: insert KFENCE hooks for SLUB Marco Elver
2020-10-30 2:49 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-29 13:16 ` [PATCH v6 6/9] kfence, kasan: make KFENCE compatible with KASAN Marco Elver
2020-10-30 2:49 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-30 13:46 ` Marco Elver
2020-10-30 15:08 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-30 15:19 ` Marco Elver
2020-10-29 13:16 ` [PATCH v6 7/9] kfence, Documentation: add KFENCE documentation Marco Elver
2020-10-30 2:49 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-30 9:59 ` Alexander Potapenko
2020-10-29 13:16 ` [PATCH v6 8/9] kfence: add test suite Marco Elver
2020-10-30 2:49 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-30 10:50 ` Marco Elver
2020-10-29 13:16 ` [PATCH v6 9/9] MAINTAINERS: Add entry for KFENCE Marco Elver
2020-10-30 2:50 ` Jann Horn
2020-10-30 2:49 ` [PATCH v6 0/9] KFENCE: A low-overhead sampling-based memory safety error detector Jann Horn
2020-10-30 10:56 ` Marco Elver
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='CAG48ez1=uad2yMeffArw7Nem3Hea3pnL9rqAFsB7fFzBd+4Hcw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jannh@google.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreyknvl@google.com \
--cc=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=joern@purestorage.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=sjpark@amazon.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).