[v2] ARM64: Kernel managed pages are only flushed

Commit Message

Bharat Bhushan March 6, 2014, 3:38 a.m. UTC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Laura Abbott [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:34 AM
> To: Bhushan Bharat-R65777; Will Deacon
> Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; Catalin Marinas; Yoder Stuart-B08248; linux-arm-
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM64: Kernel managed pages are only flushed
> 
> On 3/5/2014 8:27 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Will Deacon [mailto:[e-mail]]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 9:43 PM
> >> To: Bhushan Bharat-R65777
> >> Cc: Catalin Marinas; [e-mail]; Bhushan
> >> Bharat-R65777
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM64: Kernel managed pages are only flushed
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:25:16AM +0000, Bharat Bhushan wrote:
> >>> Kernel can only access pages which maps to managed memory.
> >>> So flush only valid kernel pages.
> >>>
> >>> I observed kernel crash direct assigning a device using VFIO and
> >>> found that it was caused because of accessing invalid page
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan <[e-mail]>
> >>> ---
> >>> v1->v2
> >>>   Getting pfn usin pte_pfn() in pfn_valid.
> >>>
> >>>   arch/arm64/mm/flush.c |   13 ++++++++++++-
> >>>   1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/flush.c b/arch/arm64/mm/flush.c index
> >>> e4193e3..319826a 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/flush.c
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/flush.c
> >>> @@ -72,7 +72,18 @@ void copy_to_user_page(struct vm_area_struct
> >>> *vma, struct page *page,
> >>>
> >>>   void __sync_icache_dcache(pte_t pte, unsigned long addr)  {
> >>> -	struct page *page = pte_page(pte);
> >>> +	struct page *page;
> >>> +
> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID
> >>> +	/*
> >>> +	 * We can only access pages that the kernel maps
> >>> +	 * as memory. Bail out for unmapped ones.
> >>> +	 */
> >>> +	if (!pfn_valid(pte_pfn(pte)))
> >>> +		return;
> >>> +
> >>> +#endif
> >>> +	page = pte_page(pte);
> >>
> >> How do you get into this function without a valid, userspace, executable pte?
> >>
> >> I suspect you've got changes elsewhere and are calling this function
> >> in a context where it's not supposed to be called.
> >
> > Below I will describe the context in which this function is called:
> >
> > When we direct assign a bus device (we have a different freescale
> > specific bus
>  > device but we can take PCI device for discussion as this logic applies
> equally  > for PCI device I think) to user space using VFIO. Then userspace
> needs to  > mmap(PCI_BARx_offset: this PCI bar offset in not a kernel visible
> memory).
> > Then VFIO-kernel mmap() ioctl code calls remap_pfn_range()  for
> > mapping the
>  >requested address. While remap_pfn_range() internally calls this function.
> >
> 
> As someone who likes calling functions in context where they aren't supposed to
> be called, I took a look a this because I was curious.

Are we saying that remap_pfn_range() should not be called in such case (described earlier the case of direct assigning PCI device to user space using VFIO) ? But x86/powerpc calls this function only.

> 
> I can confirm the same problem trying to mmap arbitrary io address space with
> remap_pfn_range. We should only be hitting this if the pte is marked as exec per
> set_pte_at. With my test case, even mmaping with only PROT_READ and PROT_WRITE
> was setting PROT_EXEC as well which was triggering the bug. This seems to be
> because READ_IMPLIES_EXEC personality was set which was derived from
> 
> #define elf_read_implies_exec(ex,stk)   (stk != EXSTACK_DISABLE_X)
> 
> and none of the binaries I'm generating seem to be setting the stack execute bit
> either way (all are EXECSTACK_DEFAULT).

Yes I agree that even if we set PROT_READ and PROT_WRITE but it internally end up setting PROT_EXEC, so we enter in flow. But I see this as a second issue. I am not sure but theoretically it can still happen that we set PROT_EXEC for anonymous page.


So either __sync_icache_dcache() should check that it does not access anonymous struct page (which this patch is doing) or __sync_icache_dcache() should not be called for anonymous page. Maybe something like this:


Please suggest if some other solution.

Thanks
-Bharat

> 
> It's not obvious what the best solution is here.
> 
> Thanks,
> Laura
> 
> --
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The
> Linux Foundation
>

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
index f0bebc5..9493f3e 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@  static inline void set_pte_at(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
                              pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
 {
        if (pte_valid_user(pte)) {
-               if (pte_exec(pte))
+               if (pte_exec(pte) && pfn_valid(pte_pfn(pte)))
                        __sync_icache_dcache(pte, addr);
                if (!pte_dirty(pte))
                        pte = pte_wrprotect(pte);