Received: by 2002:a05:6a11:4021:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id ky33csp533114pxb; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 03:18:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwtIHtezOd+Q3CuSlghlKUwkFQm/dNIuZ8Cw0nhpOuHH8W16McjvSopcerUDerw0WH/fKLL X-Received: by 2002:a92:6904:: with SMTP id e4mr11638838ilc.311.1631614706549; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 03:18:26 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1631614706; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=l6W9vA1S7DGTnvjfyHrtYMLYqSoPu52u64opsKhG2/tBIYaes3Miaoj/oIOCkPwc/F X5HuhWneLY2GTMQ/stz9eHRIspvNsIO+E5rjyfFgpgROHDTsqrmFQ03vQD8lI8r9BB3A bRr4Sj53KE+Eax1cmGaYBefjODFHFcwUWDRwqGfvVEkuopfcqFWWih32i6vbZJppnNPd e7Jt16lTMlI/PKytk2b82LLowdMbM6h3NnGcwfQFMeiMLXs8sI/nV0LPBs2XHsabWB0o NTdKnHqNG7HqTcuXwr569SuHg41gcyk2VkfTPCT1tSPTPIErBYuBvjAsMaqMNYnC2N2/ EF8A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=yxvkFAaOqLJdbyEtmA1cFytA+X5IqtuwZq6/AS79jdA=; b=VWVAZLljcfBHNGdoartX+wg79C2ND8Q6xEgqq2/8IOVstzGYcZ24aAl4TKQtWG5zZ7 80puD93iqJxrUWi+7gjJFDJl2tkFtMLltysrJJ+z71bWBsVxlfz/HRm7q5GdX636DnKP Ev+GErZgd9JzKahWma6PddLtQ5vJpstBvuV0D2AmgvVG2ad9o3SCNhhnzW9u+L3g40vy 0uP9lU4BHimywfaiSDVwu5XUVn9vzyTCc1Ll/ZXL/Hp+MF+50Fg53zocLq2aRJ3lDCAf 6l/4PibycfNlO9Bm8csXsEswT1Blnqm0pdNRoi4R7+M6GpY7CKIs3rUeRQ6SFJfYg7Q+ qEOA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y7si10155054jae.125.2021.09.14.03.18.13; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 03:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231206AbhINKSe (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 06:18:34 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:42444 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229968AbhINKSd (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 06:18:33 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89EC36D; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 03:17:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from C02TD0UTHF1T.local (unknown [10.57.21.233]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD7763F59C; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 03:17:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 11:17:09 +0100 From: Mark Rutland To: Dan Li Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Laura Abbott Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC]arm64:Mark __stack_chk_guard as __ro_after_init Message-ID: <20210914101709.GA29127@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> References: <1631612642-102881-1-git-send-email-ashimida@linux.alibaba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1631612642-102881-1-git-send-email-ashimida@linux.alibaba.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 05:44:02PM +0800, Dan Li wrote: > __stack_chk_guard is setup once while init stage and never changed > after that. > > Although the modification of this variable at runtime will usually > cause the kernel to crash (so dose the attacker), it should be marked > as _ro_after_init, and it should not affect performance if it is > placed in the ro_after_init section. > > This should also be the case on the ARM platform, or am I missing > something? > > Signed-off-by: Dan Li FWIW, this makes sense to me: Acked-by: Mark Rutland Looking at the history, this was added to arm64 in commit: c0c264ae5112d1cd ("arm64: Add CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR") ... whereas __ro_after_init was introduced around 2 years later in commit: c74ba8b3480da6dd ("arch: Introduce post-init read-only memory") ... so we weren't deliberately avoiding __ro_after_init, and there are probably a significant number of other variables we could apply it to. Mark. > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/process.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > index c8989b9..c858b85 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ > > #if defined(CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR) && !defined(CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR_PER_TASK) > #include > -unsigned long __stack_chk_guard __read_mostly; > +unsigned long __stack_chk_guard __ro_after_init; > EXPORT_SYMBOL(__stack_chk_guard); > #endif > > -- > 2.7.4 >