Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.1 \(3445.101.1\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vmalloc: New flag for flush before releasing pages
From:   Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <C658F765-F38B-44DF-9FCE-B5ECB5DD9A86@amacapital.net>
Date:   Tue, 4 Dec 2018 15:34:09 -0800
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
        "Naveen N . Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, jeyu@kernel.org,
        Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@linux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        "Dock, Deneen T" <deneen.t.dock@intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1FCD958E-C875-4F26-8E59-10615D7BF22E@gmail.com>
References: <20181128000754.18056-1-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
 <20181128000754.18056-2-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
 <4883FED1-D0EC-41B0-A90F-1A697756D41D@gmail.com>
 <CALCETrXvddt148fncMJqpjK98uatiK-44knYFWU0-ytf8X+iog@mail.gmail.com>
 <08141F66-F3E6-4CC5-AF91-1ED5F101A54C@gmail.com>
 <CALCETrXLrsKDBzDkN7sc9HYPWe9aV3NQzf4vMvM+FD8j6aA6AQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20CC2F71-308D-42E2-8C54-F64D7CC3863F@gmail.com>
 <C658F765-F38B-44DF-9FCE-B5ECB5DD9A86@amacapital.net>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> On Dec 4, 2018, at 3:27 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> =
wrote:
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> On Dec 4, 2018, at 2:48 PM, Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
>>> On Dec 4, 2018, at 11:48 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> =
wrote:
>>>=20
>>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 4, 2018, at 10:56 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> =
wrote:
>>>>>=20
>>>>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 5:43 PM Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>>>>>>> On Nov 27, 2018, at 4:07 PM, Rick Edgecombe =
<rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Since vfree will lazily flush the TLB, but not lazily free the =
underlying pages,
>>>>>>> it often leaves stale TLB entries to freed pages that could get =
re-used. This is
>>>>>>> undesirable for cases where the memory being freed has special =
permissions such
>>>>>>> as executable.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> So I am trying to finish my patch-set for preventing transient =
W+X mappings
>>>>>> from taking space, by handling kprobes & ftrace that I missed =
(thanks again for
>>>>>> pointing it out).
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> But all of the sudden, I don=E2=80=99t understand why we have the =
problem that this
>>>>>> (your) patch-set deals with at all. We already change the =
mappings to make
>>>>>> the memory writable before freeing the memory, so why can=E2=80=99t=
 we make it
>>>>>> non-executable at the same time? Actually, why do we make the =
module memory,
>>>>>> including its data executable before freeing it???
>>>>>=20
>>>>> All the code you're looking at is IMO a very awkward and possibly
>>>>> incorrect of doing what's actually necessary: putting the direct =
map
>>>>> the way it wants to be.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Can't we shove this entirely mess into vunmap?  Have a flag (as =
part
>>>>> of vmalloc like in Rick's patch or as a flag passed to a vfree =
variant
>>>>> directly) that makes the vunmap code that frees the underlying =
pages
>>>>> also reset their permissions?
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Right now, we muck with set_memory_rw() and set_memory_nx(), which
>>>>> both have very awkward (and inconsistent with each other!) =
semantics
>>>>> when called on vmalloc memory.  And they have their own flushes, =
which
>>>>> is inefficient.  Maybe the right solution is for vunmap to remove =
the
>>>>> vmap area PTEs, call into a function like set_memory_rw() that =
resets
>>>>> the direct maps to their default permissions *without* flushing, =
and
>>>>> then to do a single flush for everything.  Or, even better, to =
cause
>>>>> the change_page_attr code to do the flush and also to flush the =
vmap
>>>>> area all at once so that very small free operations can flush =
single
>>>>> pages instead of flushing globally.
>>>>=20
>>>> Thanks for the explanation. I read it just after I realized that =
indeed the
>>>> whole purpose of this code is to get cpa_process_alias()
>>>> update the corresponding direct mapping.
>>>>=20
>>>> This thing (pageattr.c) indeed seems over-engineered and very =
unintuitive.
>>>> Right now I have a list of patch-sets that I owe, so I don=E2=80=99t =
have the time
>>>> to deal with it.
>>>>=20
>>>> But, I still think that disable_ro_nx() should not call =
set_memory_x().
>>>> IIUC, this breaks W+X of the direct-mapping which correspond with =
the module
>>>> memory. Does it ever stop being W+X?? I=E2=80=99ll have another =
look.
>>>=20
>>> Dunno.  I did once chase down a bug where some memory got freed =
while
>>> it was still read-only, and the results were hilarious and hard to
>>> debug, since the explosion happened long after the buggy code
>>> finished.
>>=20
>> This piece of code causes me pain and misery.
>>=20
>> So, it turns out that the direct map is *not* changed if you just =
change
>> the NX-bit. See change_page_attr_set_clr():
>>=20
>>       /* No alias checking for _NX bit modifications */
>>       checkalias =3D (pgprot_val(mask_set) | pgprot_val(mask_clr)) !=3D=
 _PAGE_NX;
>>=20
>> How many levels of abstraction are broken in the way? What would =
happen
>> if somebody tries to change the NX-bit and some other bit in the PTE?
>> Luckily, I don=E2=80=99t think someone does=E2=80=A6 at least for =
now.
>>=20
>> So, again, I think the change I proposed makes sense. nios2 does not =
have
>> set_memory_x() and it will not be affected.
>>=20
>> [ I can add a comment, although I don=E2=80=99t have know if nios2 =
has an NX bit,
>> and I don=E2=80=99t find any code that defines PTEs. Actually where =
is pte_present()
>> of nios2 being defined? Whatever. ]
>=20
> At least rename the function, then. The last thing we need is for
> disable_ro_nx to *enable* NX.

The code is so horrible right now (IMHO), that it will not make it much
worse. But, yes, I will of course change the name. I just want to finish
this text_poke() patch-set and W+X mappings keep popping up.

Thanks (as usual) for your help.