| Message ID | 20241029141421.715686-1-maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | selftests/lam: Test get_user() LAM pointer handling | expand |
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 03:14:20PM +0100, Maciej Wieczor-Retman wrote: > Recent change in how get_user() handles pointers [1] has a specific case > for LAM. It assigns a different bitmask that's later used to check > whether a pointer comes from userland in get_user(). > > While currently commented out (until LASS [2] is merged into the kernel) > it's worth making changes to the LAM selftest ahead of time. > > Add test case to LAM that utilizes a ioctl (FIOASYNC) syscall which uses > get_user() in its implementation. Execute the syscall with differently > tagged pointers to verify that valid user pointers are passing through > and invalid kernel/non-canonical pointers are not. > > Code was tested on a Sierra Forest Xeon machine that's LAM capable. The > test was ran without issues with both the LAM lines from [1] untouched > and commented out. The test was also ran without issues with LAM_SUP > both enabled and disabled. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241024013214.129639-1-torvalds@linux-foundation.org/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240710160655.3402786-1-alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Maciej Wieczor-Retman <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 85 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c > index 0ea4f6813930..3c53d4b7aa61 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ > #include <stdlib.h> > #include <string.h> > #include <sys/syscall.h> > +#include <sys/ioctl.h> > #include <time.h> > #include <signal.h> > #include <setjmp.h> > @@ -43,10 +44,19 @@ > #define FUNC_INHERITE 0x20 > #define FUNC_PASID 0x40 > > +/* get_user() pointer test cases */ > +#define GET_USER_USER 0 > +#define GET_USER_KERNEL_TOP 1 > +#define GET_USER_KERNEL_BOT 2 > +#define GET_USER_KERNEL 3 > + > #define TEST_MASK 0x7f > +#define L5_SIGN_EXT_MASK (0xFFUL << 56) > +#define L4_SIGN_EXT_MASK (0x1FFFFUL << 47) > > #define LOW_ADDR (0x1UL << 30) > #define HIGH_ADDR (0x3UL << 48) > +#define L5_ADDR (0x1UL << 48) > > #define MALLOC_LEN 32 > > @@ -370,6 +380,54 @@ static int handle_syscall(struct testcases *test) > return ret; > } > > +static int get_user_syscall(struct testcases *test) > +{ > + int ret = 0; > + int ptr_value = 0; > + void *ptr = &ptr_value; > + int fd; > + > + uint64_t bitmask = ((uint64_t)ptr & L5_ADDR) ? L5_SIGN_EXT_MASK : > + L4_SIGN_EXT_MASK; Emm. Do you expect stack to be above at the very top of address space on 5-level paging machines? It is not true. We don't allocate any memory above 46-bit unless asked explicitly. See tools/testing/selftests/mm/va_high_addr_switch.c
On 2024-10-30 at 14:31:51 +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 03:14:20PM +0100, Maciej Wieczor-Retman wrote: >> Recent change in how get_user() handles pointers [1] has a specific case >> for LAM. It assigns a different bitmask that's later used to check >> whether a pointer comes from userland in get_user(). >> >> While currently commented out (until LASS [2] is merged into the kernel) >> it's worth making changes to the LAM selftest ahead of time. >> >> Add test case to LAM that utilizes a ioctl (FIOASYNC) syscall which uses >> get_user() in its implementation. Execute the syscall with differently >> tagged pointers to verify that valid user pointers are passing through >> and invalid kernel/non-canonical pointers are not. >> >> Code was tested on a Sierra Forest Xeon machine that's LAM capable. The >> test was ran without issues with both the LAM lines from [1] untouched >> and commented out. The test was also ran without issues with LAM_SUP >> both enabled and disabled. >> >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241024013214.129639-1-torvalds@linux-foundation.org/ >> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240710160655.3402786-1-alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com/ >> >> Signed-off-by: Maciej Wieczor-Retman <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com> >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 85 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c >> index 0ea4f6813930..3c53d4b7aa61 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c >> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ >> #include <stdlib.h> >> #include <string.h> >> #include <sys/syscall.h> >> +#include <sys/ioctl.h> >> #include <time.h> >> #include <signal.h> >> #include <setjmp.h> >> @@ -43,10 +44,19 @@ >> #define FUNC_INHERITE 0x20 >> #define FUNC_PASID 0x40 >> >> +/* get_user() pointer test cases */ >> +#define GET_USER_USER 0 >> +#define GET_USER_KERNEL_TOP 1 >> +#define GET_USER_KERNEL_BOT 2 >> +#define GET_USER_KERNEL 3 >> + >> #define TEST_MASK 0x7f >> +#define L5_SIGN_EXT_MASK (0xFFUL << 56) >> +#define L4_SIGN_EXT_MASK (0x1FFFFUL << 47) >> >> #define LOW_ADDR (0x1UL << 30) >> #define HIGH_ADDR (0x3UL << 48) >> +#define L5_ADDR (0x1UL << 48) >> >> #define MALLOC_LEN 32 >> >> @@ -370,6 +380,54 @@ static int handle_syscall(struct testcases *test) >> return ret; >> } >> >> +static int get_user_syscall(struct testcases *test) >> +{ >> + int ret = 0; >> + int ptr_value = 0; >> + void *ptr = &ptr_value; >> + int fd; >> + >> + uint64_t bitmask = ((uint64_t)ptr & L5_ADDR) ? L5_SIGN_EXT_MASK : >> + L4_SIGN_EXT_MASK; > >Emm. Do you expect stack to be above at the very top of address space on >5-level paging machines? It is not true. We don't allocate any memory >above 46-bit unless asked explicitly. Right, I'm not sure why I thought that would work here. >See tools/testing/selftests/mm/va_high_addr_switch.c Thanks for the tip, I'll use mmap/munmap to determine the enabled pagetable level. > >-- > Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c index 0ea4f6813930..3c53d4b7aa61 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ #include <stdlib.h> #include <string.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> +#include <sys/ioctl.h> #include <time.h> #include <signal.h> #include <setjmp.h> @@ -43,10 +44,19 @@ #define FUNC_INHERITE 0x20 #define FUNC_PASID 0x40 +/* get_user() pointer test cases */ +#define GET_USER_USER 0 +#define GET_USER_KERNEL_TOP 1 +#define GET_USER_KERNEL_BOT 2 +#define GET_USER_KERNEL 3 + #define TEST_MASK 0x7f +#define L5_SIGN_EXT_MASK (0xFFUL << 56) +#define L4_SIGN_EXT_MASK (0x1FFFFUL << 47) #define LOW_ADDR (0x1UL << 30) #define HIGH_ADDR (0x3UL << 48) +#define L5_ADDR (0x1UL << 48) #define MALLOC_LEN 32 @@ -370,6 +380,54 @@ static int handle_syscall(struct testcases *test) return ret; } +static int get_user_syscall(struct testcases *test) +{ + int ret = 0; + int ptr_value = 0; + void *ptr = &ptr_value; + int fd; + + uint64_t bitmask = ((uint64_t)ptr & L5_ADDR) ? L5_SIGN_EXT_MASK : + L4_SIGN_EXT_MASK; + + if (test->lam != 0) + if (set_lam(test->lam) != 0) + return 2; + + fd = memfd_create("lam_ioctl", 0); + if (fd == -1) + exit(EXIT_FAILURE); + + switch (test->later) { + case GET_USER_USER: + /* Control group - properly tagger user pointer */ + ptr = (void *)set_metadata((uint64_t)ptr, test->lam); + break; + case GET_USER_KERNEL_TOP: + /* Kernel address with top bit cleared */ + bitmask &= (bitmask >> 1); + ptr = (void *)((uint64_t)ptr | bitmask); + break; + case GET_USER_KERNEL_BOT: + /* Kernel address with bottom sign-extension bit cleared */ + bitmask &= (bitmask << 1); + ptr = (void *)((uint64_t)ptr | bitmask); + break; + case GET_USER_KERNEL: + /* Try to pass a kernel address */ + ptr = (void *)((uint64_t)ptr | bitmask); + break; + default: + printf("Invalid test case value passed!\n"); + break; + } + + if (ioctl(fd, FIOASYNC, ptr) != 0) + ret = 1; + + return ret; +} + int sys_uring_setup(unsigned int entries, struct io_uring_params *p) { return (int)syscall(__NR_io_uring_setup, entries, p); @@ -883,6 +941,33 @@ static struct testcases syscall_cases[] = { .test_func = handle_syscall, .msg = "SYSCALL:[Negative] Disable LAM. Dereferencing pointer with metadata.\n", }, + { + .later = GET_USER_USER, + .lam = LAM_U57_BITS, + .test_func = get_user_syscall, + .msg = "GET_USER: get_user() and pass a properly tagged user pointer.\n", + }, + { + .later = GET_USER_KERNEL_TOP, + .expected = 1, + .lam = LAM_U57_BITS, + .test_func = get_user_syscall, + .msg = "GET_USER:[Negative] get_user() with a kernel pointer and the top bit cleared.\n", + }, + { + .later = GET_USER_KERNEL_BOT, + .expected = 1, + .lam = LAM_U57_BITS, + .test_func = get_user_syscall, + .msg = "GET_USER:[Negative] get_user() with a kernel pointer and the bottom sign-extension bit cleared.\n", + }, + { + .later = GET_USER_KERNEL, + .expected = 1, + .lam = LAM_U57_BITS, + .test_func = get_user_syscall, + .msg = "GET_USER:[Negative] get_user() and pass a kernel pointer.\n", + }, }; static struct testcases mmap_cases[] = {
Recent change in how get_user() handles pointers [1] has a specific case for LAM. It assigns a different bitmask that's later used to check whether a pointer comes from userland in get_user(). While currently commented out (until LASS [2] is merged into the kernel) it's worth making changes to the LAM selftest ahead of time. Add test case to LAM that utilizes a ioctl (FIOASYNC) syscall which uses get_user() in its implementation. Execute the syscall with differently tagged pointers to verify that valid user pointers are passing through and invalid kernel/non-canonical pointers are not. Code was tested on a Sierra Forest Xeon machine that's LAM capable. The test was ran without issues with both the LAM lines from [1] untouched and commented out. The test was also ran without issues with LAM_SUP both enabled and disabled. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241024013214.129639-1-torvalds@linux-foundation.org/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240710160655.3402786-1-alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com/ Signed-off-by: Maciej Wieczor-Retman <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/x86/lam.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 85 insertions(+)