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=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH 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 0944AC072B5 for ; Fri, 24 May 2019 14:26:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C805720863 for ; Fri, 24 May 2019 14:26:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="Ymf3dbVV" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391629AbfEXO0d (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 May 2019 10:26:33 -0400 Received: from aserp2130.oracle.com ([141.146.126.79]:48810 "EHLO aserp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390885AbfEXO0c (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 May 2019 10:26:32 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x4OE8bjv170883; Fri, 24 May 2019 14:25:48 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=OJhMCvW2kp8bOu0Aj9xHYqe11sQBRT1hGdecAvzomjs=; b=Ymf3dbVVSk/usGv/LWyN8I3YdUizbsu/NiEI/I45nxcgQtjyJP24xaCjavUVvrMsM2O6 yEP3RCJrHDJF5nnRuz4iw9XN7owpeQqjW6DAcNsFAO79ZSNGKG1WbLKp1rBvO3sJA5Dr +fBrLpy1lQu6d91Ea6iJuVHlzyPxZBxwhYSSJ8nFZjA8cuYTCNKl6zTycOpBAIsWwpl+ g1GFUsvpVXx8ufMZ3zfNa2womboo5KLhh4oJCIIc9jToeIVyIP/Opv9xH3hpRByfsilL vIwIH66z4yFn+YxGOtQgVRvyfsmkvl77RxspM3YzOuGKjPJ5b3GlOA6tg3BSpgx4LR4x mw== Received: from aserp3030.oracle.com (aserp3030.oracle.com [141.146.126.71]) by aserp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2smsk5sewf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 24 May 2019 14:25:48 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x4OEPft9008165; Fri, 24 May 2019 14:25:48 GMT Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by aserp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2smsgtwpfx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 24 May 2019 14:25:47 +0000 Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x4OEPkT8002811; Fri, 24 May 2019 14:25:46 GMT Received: from [192.168.1.16] (/24.9.64.241) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 24 May 2019 14:25:45 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel To: Catalin Marinas Cc: Kees Cook , Evgenii Stepanov , Andrey Konovalov , Linux ARM , Linux Memory Management List , LKML , amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Vincenzo Frascino , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , Andrew Morton , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Yishai Hadas , Felix Kuehling , Alexander Deucher , Christian Koenig , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Jens Wiklander , Alex Williamson , Leon Romanovsky , Dmitry Vyukov , Kostya Serebryany , Lee Smith , Ramana Radhakrishnan , Jacob Bramley , Ruben Ayrapetyan , Robin Murphy , Luc Van Oostenryck , Dave Martin , Kevin Brodsky , Szabolcs Nagy , Elliott Hughes References: <20190517144931.GA56186@arrakis.emea.arm.com> <20190521182932.sm4vxweuwo5ermyd@mbp> <201905211633.6C0BF0C2@keescook> <6049844a-65f5-f513-5b58-7141588fef2b@oracle.com> <20190523201105.oifkksus4rzcwqt4@mbp> <20190524101139.36yre4af22bkvatx@mbp> From: Khalid Aziz Organization: Oracle Corp Message-ID: Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 08:25:42 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190524101139.36yre4af22bkvatx@mbp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9266 signatures=668687 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905240096 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9266 signatures=668687 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905240096 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/24/19 4:11 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 03:49:05PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: >> On 5/23/19 2:11 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote: >>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:51:40AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: >>>> On 5/21/19 6:04 PM, Kees Cook wrote: >>>>> As an aside: I think Sparc ADI support in Linux actually side-stepp= ed >>>>> this[1] (i.e. chose "solution 1"): "All addresses passed to kernel = must >>>>> be non-ADI tagged addresses." (And sadly, "Kernel does not enable A= DI >>>>> for kernel code.") I think this was a mistake we should not repeat = for >>>>> arm64 (we do seem to be at least in agreement about this, I think).= >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/654481/ >>>> >>>> That is a very early version of the sparc ADI patch. Support for tag= ged >>>> addresses in syscalls was added in later versions and is in the patc= h >>>> that is in the kernel. >>> >>> I tried to figure out but I'm not familiar with the sparc port. How d= id >>> you solve the tagged address going into various syscall implementatio= ns >>> in the kernel (e.g. sys_write)? Is the tag removed on kernel entry or= it >>> ends up deeper in the core code? >> >> Another spot I should point out in ADI patch - Tags are not stored in >> VMAs and IOMMU does not support ADI tags on M7. ADI tags are stripped >> before userspace addresses are passed to IOMMU in the following snippe= t >> from the patch: >> >> diff --git a/arch/sparc/mm/gup.c b/arch/sparc/mm/gup.c >> index 5335ba3c850e..357b6047653a 100644 >> --- a/arch/sparc/mm/gup.c >> +++ b/arch/sparc/mm/gup.c >> @@ -201,6 +202,24 @@ int __get_user_pages_fast(unsigned long start, in= t >> nr_pages >> , int write, >> pgd_t *pgdp; >> int nr =3D 0; >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARC64 >> + if (adi_capable()) { >> + long addr =3D start; >> + >> + /* If userspace has passed a versioned address, kernel= >> + * will not find it in the VMAs since it does not stor= e >> + * the version tags in the list of VMAs. Storing versi= on >> + * tags in list of VMAs is impractical since they can = be >> + * changed any time from userspace without dropping in= to >> + * kernel. Any address search in VMAs will be done wit= h >> + * non-versioned addresses. Ensure the ADI version bit= s >> + * are dropped here by sign extending the last bit bef= ore >> + * ADI bits. IOMMU does not implement version tags. >> + */ >> + addr =3D (addr << (long)adi_nbits()) >> (long)adi_nbit= s(); >> + start =3D addr; >> + } >> +#endif >> start &=3D PAGE_MASK; >> addr =3D start; >> len =3D (unsigned long) nr_pages << PAGE_SHIFT; >=20 > Thanks Khalid. I missed that sparc does not enable HAVE_GENERIC_GUP, so= > you fix this case here. If we add the generic untagged_addr() macro in > the generic code, I think sparc can start making use of it rather than > open-coding the shifts. Hi Catalin, Yes, that will be good. Right now addresses are untagged in sparc code in only two spots but that will expand as we expand use of tags. Scalabale solution is definitely better. >=20 > There are a few other other places where tags can leak and the core cod= e > would get confused (for example, madvise()). I presume your user space > doesn't exercise them. On arm64 we plan to just allow the C library to > tag any new memory allocation, so those core code paths would need to b= e > covered. >=20 > And similarly, devices, IOMMU, any DMA would ignore tags. >=20 Right. You are doing lot more with tags than sparc code intended to do. I had looked into implementing just malloc(), mmap() and possibly shmat() in library that automatically tags pointers. Expanding tags to any pointers in C library will require covering lot more paths in kernel.= -- Khalid