From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935549AbeEIRS6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2018 13:18:58 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:7000 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935088AbeEIRSy (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2018 13:18:54 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,382,1520924400"; d="scan'208";a="40511721" Subject: [PATCH 07/13] x86/pkeys/selftests: Add PROT_EXEC test To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Hansen , linuxram@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, dave.hansen@intel.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, mingo@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, shuah@kernel.org From: Dave Hansen Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 10:13:48 -0700 References: <20180509171336.76636D88@viggo.jf.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20180509171336.76636D88@viggo.jf.intel.com> Message-Id: <20180509171348.9EEE4BEF@viggo.jf.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Dave Hansen Under the covers, implement executable-only memory with protection keys when userspace calls mprotect(PROT_EXEC). But, we did not have a selftest for that. Now we do. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen Cc: Ram Pai Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Dave Hansen Cc: Michael Ellermen Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Shuah Khan --- b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+) diff -puN tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c~pkeys-selftests-prot_exec tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c~pkeys-selftests-prot_exec 2018-05-09 09:20:21.273698400 -0700 +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c 2018-05-09 09:20:21.276698400 -0700 @@ -1288,6 +1288,49 @@ void test_executing_on_unreadable_memory expected_pk_fault(pkey); } +void test_implicit_mprotect_exec_only_memory(int *ptr, u16 pkey) +{ + void *p1; + int scratch; + int ptr_contents; + int ret; + + dprintf1("%s() start\n", __func__); + + p1 = get_pointer_to_instructions(); + lots_o_noops_around_write(&scratch); + ptr_contents = read_ptr(p1); + dprintf2("ptr (%p) contents@%d: %x\n", p1, __LINE__, ptr_contents); + + /* Use a *normal* mprotect(), not mprotect_pkey(): */ + ret = mprotect(p1, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_EXEC); + pkey_assert(!ret); + + dprintf2("pkru: %x\n", rdpkru()); + + /* Make sure this is an *instruction* fault */ + madvise(p1, PAGE_SIZE, MADV_DONTNEED); + lots_o_noops_around_write(&scratch); + do_not_expect_pk_fault("executing on PROT_EXEC memory"); + ptr_contents = read_ptr(p1); + dprintf2("ptr (%p) contents@%d: %x\n", p1, __LINE__, ptr_contents); + expected_pk_fault(UNKNOWN_PKEY); + + /* + * Put the memory back to non-PROT_EXEC. Should clear the + * exec-only pkey off the VMA and allow it to be readable + * again. Go to PROT_NONE first to check for a kernel bug + * that did not clear the pkey when doing PROT_NONE. + */ + ret = mprotect(p1, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_NONE); + pkey_assert(!ret); + + ret = mprotect(p1, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_READ|PROT_EXEC); + pkey_assert(!ret); + ptr_contents = read_ptr(p1); + do_not_expect_pk_fault("plain read on recently PROT_EXEC area"); +} + void test_mprotect_pkey_on_unsupported_cpu(int *ptr, u16 pkey) { int size = PAGE_SIZE; @@ -1312,6 +1355,7 @@ void (*pkey_tests[])(int *ptr, u16 pkey) test_kernel_gup_of_access_disabled_region, test_kernel_gup_write_to_write_disabled_region, test_executing_on_unreadable_memory, + test_implicit_mprotect_exec_only_memory, test_ptrace_of_child, test_pkey_syscalls_on_non_allocated_pkey, test_pkey_syscalls_bad_args, _