linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
	khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	bsingharora@gmail.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, hbabu@us.ibm.com,
	linuxram@us.ibm.com
Subject: [RFC v2 11/12]Documentation: Documentation updates.
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:52:43 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1497671564-20030-12-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1497671564-20030-1-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com>

The Documentaton file is moved from x86 into the generic area,
since this feature is now supported by more than one archs.

Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
---
 Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt  | 110 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt |  85 --------------------------
 2 files changed, 110 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt
 delete mode 100644 Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt b/Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b49e6bb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+Memory Protection Keys for Userspace (PKU aka PKEYs) is a CPU feature
+found in new generation of intel CPUs on PowerPC CPUs.
+
+Memory Protection Keys provides a mechanism for enforcing page-based
+protections, but without requiring modification of the page tables
+when an application changes protection domains.
+
+
+On Intel:
+
+It works by dedicating 4 previously ignored bits in each page table
+entry to a "protection key", giving 16 possible keys.
+
+There is also a new user-accessible register (PKRU) with two separate
+bits (Access Disable and Write Disable) for each key.  Being a CPU
+register, PKRU is inherently thread-local, potentially giving each
+thread a different set of protections from every other thread.
+
+There are two new instructions (RDPKRU/WRPKRU) for reading and writing
+to the new register.  The feature is only available in 64-bit mode,
+even though there is theoretically space in the PAE PTEs.  These
+permissions are enforced on data access only and have no effect on
+instruction fetches.
+
+
+On PowerPC:
+
+It works by dedicating 5 page table entry to a "protection key",
+giving 32 possible keys.
+
+There is a user-accessible register (AMR) with two separate bits
+(Access Disable and Write Disable) for each key.  Being a CPU
+register, AMR is inherently thread-local, potentially giving each
+thread a different set of protections from every other thread.
+NOTE: Disabling read permission does not disable
+write and vice-versa.
+
+The feature is available on 64-bit HPTE mode only.
+
+'mtspr 0xd, mem' reads the AMR register
+'mfspr mem, 0xd' writes into the AMR register.
+
+Permissions are enforced on data access only and have no effect on
+instruction fetches.
+
+=========================== Syscalls ===========================
+
+There are 3 system calls which directly interact with pkeys:
+
+	int pkey_alloc(unsigned long flags, unsigned long init_access_rights)
+	int pkey_free(int pkey);
+	int pkey_mprotect(unsigned long start, size_t len,
+			  unsigned long prot, int pkey);
+
+Before a pkey can be used, it must first be allocated with
+pkey_alloc().  An application calls the WRPKRU instruction
+directly in order to change access permissions to memory covered
+with a key.  In this example WRPKRU is wrapped by a C function
+called pkey_set().
+
+	int real_prot = PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE;
+	pkey = pkey_alloc(0, PKEY_DENY_WRITE);
+	ptr = mmap(NULL, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_NONE, MAP_ANONYMOUS|MAP_PRIVATE, -1, 0);
+	ret = pkey_mprotect(ptr, PAGE_SIZE, real_prot, pkey);
+	... application runs here
+
+Now, if the application needs to update the data at 'ptr', it can
+gain access, do the update, then remove its write access:
+
+	pkey_set(pkey, 0); // clear PKEY_DENY_WRITE
+	*ptr = foo; // assign something
+	pkey_set(pkey, PKEY_DENY_WRITE); // set PKEY_DENY_WRITE again
+
+Now when it frees the memory, it will also free the pkey since it
+is no longer in use:
+
+	munmap(ptr, PAGE_SIZE);
+	pkey_free(pkey);
+
+(Note: pkey_set() is a wrapper for the RDPKRU and WRPKRU instructions.
+ An example implementation can be found in
+ tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c)
+
+=========================== Behavior ===========================
+
+The kernel attempts to make protection keys consistent with the
+behavior of a plain mprotect().  For instance if you do this:
+
+	mprotect(ptr, size, PROT_NONE);
+	something(ptr);
+
+you can expect the same effects with protection keys when doing this:
+
+	pkey = pkey_alloc(0, PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE | PKEY_DISABLE_READ);
+	pkey_mprotect(ptr, size, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, pkey);
+	something(ptr);
+
+That should be true whether something() is a direct access to 'ptr'
+like:
+
+	*ptr = foo;
+
+or when the kernel does the access on the application's behalf like
+with a read():
+
+	read(fd, ptr, 1);
+
+The kernel will send a SIGSEGV in both cases, but si_code will be set
+to SEGV_PKERR when violating protection keys versus SEGV_ACCERR when
+the plain mprotect() permissions are violated.
diff --git a/Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt b/Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index b643045..0000000
--- a/Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,85 +0,0 @@
-Memory Protection Keys for Userspace (PKU aka PKEYs) is a CPU feature
-which will be found on future Intel CPUs.
-
-Memory Protection Keys provides a mechanism for enforcing page-based
-protections, but without requiring modification of the page tables
-when an application changes protection domains.  It works by
-dedicating 4 previously ignored bits in each page table entry to a
-"protection key", giving 16 possible keys.
-
-There is also a new user-accessible register (PKRU) with two separate
-bits (Access Disable and Write Disable) for each key.  Being a CPU
-register, PKRU is inherently thread-local, potentially giving each
-thread a different set of protections from every other thread.
-
-There are two new instructions (RDPKRU/WRPKRU) for reading and writing
-to the new register.  The feature is only available in 64-bit mode,
-even though there is theoretically space in the PAE PTEs.  These
-permissions are enforced on data access only and have no effect on
-instruction fetches.
-
-=========================== Syscalls ===========================
-
-There are 3 system calls which directly interact with pkeys:
-
-	int pkey_alloc(unsigned long flags, unsigned long init_access_rights)
-	int pkey_free(int pkey);
-	int pkey_mprotect(unsigned long start, size_t len,
-			  unsigned long prot, int pkey);
-
-Before a pkey can be used, it must first be allocated with
-pkey_alloc().  An application calls the WRPKRU instruction
-directly in order to change access permissions to memory covered
-with a key.  In this example WRPKRU is wrapped by a C function
-called pkey_set().
-
-	int real_prot = PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE;
-	pkey = pkey_alloc(0, PKEY_DENY_WRITE);
-	ptr = mmap(NULL, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_NONE, MAP_ANONYMOUS|MAP_PRIVATE, -1, 0);
-	ret = pkey_mprotect(ptr, PAGE_SIZE, real_prot, pkey);
-	... application runs here
-
-Now, if the application needs to update the data at 'ptr', it can
-gain access, do the update, then remove its write access:
-
-	pkey_set(pkey, 0); // clear PKEY_DENY_WRITE
-	*ptr = foo; // assign something
-	pkey_set(pkey, PKEY_DENY_WRITE); // set PKEY_DENY_WRITE again
-
-Now when it frees the memory, it will also free the pkey since it
-is no longer in use:
-
-	munmap(ptr, PAGE_SIZE);
-	pkey_free(pkey);
-
-(Note: pkey_set() is a wrapper for the RDPKRU and WRPKRU instructions.
- An example implementation can be found in
- tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c)
-
-=========================== Behavior ===========================
-
-The kernel attempts to make protection keys consistent with the
-behavior of a plain mprotect().  For instance if you do this:
-
-	mprotect(ptr, size, PROT_NONE);
-	something(ptr);
-
-you can expect the same effects with protection keys when doing this:
-
-	pkey = pkey_alloc(0, PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE | PKEY_DISABLE_READ);
-	pkey_mprotect(ptr, size, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, pkey);
-	something(ptr);
-
-That should be true whether something() is a direct access to 'ptr'
-like:
-
-	*ptr = foo;
-
-or when the kernel does the access on the application's behalf like
-with a read():
-
-	read(fd, ptr, 1);
-
-The kernel will send a SIGSEGV in both cases, but si_code will be set
-to SEGV_PKERR when violating protection keys versus SEGV_ACCERR when
-the plain mprotect() permissions are violated.
-- 
1.8.3.1

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-06-17  3:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-17  3:52 [RFC v2 00/12] powerpc: Memory Protection Keys Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 01/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 4K backed hpte pages Ram Pai
2017-06-20 10:20   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:23     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  5:35       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  6:34         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  6:41   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21  9:30     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-22  9:07   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-22 16:20     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 02/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 64K " Ram Pai
2017-06-20 10:51   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:25     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  6:50   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21  6:54   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21 20:14     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 03/12] powerpc: Implement sys_pkey_alloc and sys_pkey_free system call Ram Pai
2017-06-19 12:18   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-20 22:45     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 04/12] powerpc: store and restore the pkey state across context switches Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 05/12] powerpc: Implementation for sys_mprotect_pkey() system call Ram Pai
2017-06-21  7:16   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 06/12] powerpc: Program HPTE key protection bits Ram Pai
2017-06-20  8:21   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:26     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 07/12] powerpc: Macro the mask used for checking DSI exception Ram Pai
2017-06-20  8:14   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:28     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  7:25   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21  9:17     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 08/12] powerpc: Handle exceptions caused by violation of pkey protection Ram Pai
2017-06-20  7:24   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:43     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  3:54       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  6:26         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 09/12] powerpc: Deliver SEGV signal on pkey violation Ram Pai
2017-06-20  6:54   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:56     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  3:18       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  6:10         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 10/12] powerpc: Read AMR only if pkey-violation caused the exception Ram Pai
2017-06-19 11:06   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-19 17:59     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20  6:46       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:58         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20 23:56     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` Ram Pai [this message]
2017-06-20  6:18   ` [RFC v2 11/12]Documentation: Documentation updates Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  0:04     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 12/12]selftest: Updated protection key selftest Ram Pai
2017-06-19 11:04   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-20  6:26   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  0:10     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20  5:10 ` [RFC v2 00/12] powerpc: Memory Protection Keys Balbir Singh
2017-06-20  6:05   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20  9:56   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt

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=1497671564-20030-12-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com \
    --to=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=hbabu@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.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).