+Kees and Jorge and Jann
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 7:45 AM Kevin Brodsky kevin.brodsky@arm.com wrote:
This series is a follow-up to Joey's Permission Overlay Extension (POE) series [1] that recently landed on mainline. The goal is to improve the way we handle the register that governs which pkeys/POIndex are accessible (POR_EL0) during signal delivery. As things stand, we may unexpectedly fail to write the signal frame on the stack because POR_EL0 is not reset before the uaccess operations. See patch 1 for more details and the main changes this series brings.
A similar series landed recently for x86/MPK [2]; the present series aims at aligning arm64 with x86. Worth noting: once the signal frame is written, POR_EL0 is still set to POR_EL0_INIT, granting access to pkey 0 only. This means that a program that sets up an alternate signal stack with a non-zero pkey will need some assembly trampoline to set POR_EL0 before invoking the real signal handler, as discussed here [3]. This is not ideal, but it makes experimentation with pkeys in signal handlers possible while waiting for a potential interface to control the pkey state when delivering a signal. See Pierre's reply [4] for more information about use-cases and a potential interface.
Apologize in advance that I'm unfamiliar with ARM's POR, up to review this patch series, so I might ask silly questions or based on wrong understanding.
It seems that the patch has the same logic as Aruna Ramakrishna proposed for X86, is this correct ?
In the latest version of x86 change [1], I have a comment if we want to consider adding a new flag SS_PKEYALTSTACK (see SS_AUTODISARM as an example) in sigaltstack, and restrict this mechanism (overwriting PKRU/POR_EL0 and sigframe) to sigaltstack() with SS_PKEYALTSTACK. There is a subtle difference if we do that, i.e. the existing signaling handling user might not care or do not use PKEY/POE, and overwriting PKRU/POR_EL0 and sigframe every time will add extra CPU time on the signaling delivery, which could be real-time sensitive.
Since I raised this comment on X86, I think raising it for ARM for discussion would be ok, it might make sense to have consistent API experience for arm/x86 here.
Thanks -Jeff
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CABi2SkWjF2Sicrr71=a6H8XJyf9q9L_Nd5FPp0CJ2mvB46...
The x86 series also added kselftests to ensure that no spurious SIGSEGV occurs during signal delivery regardless of which pkey is accessible at the point where the signal is delivered. This series adapts those kselftests to allow running them on arm64 (patch 4-5). There is a dependency on Yury's PKEY_UNRESTRICTED patch [7] for patch 4 specifically.
Finally patch 2 is a clean-up following feedback on Joey's series [5].
I have tested this series on arm64 and x86_64 (booting and running the protection_keys and pkey_sighandler_tests mm kselftests).
- Kevin
v2..v3:
- Reordered patches (patch 1 is now the main patch).
- Patch 1: compute por_enable_all with an explicit loop, based on arch_max_pkey() (suggestion from Dave M).
- Patch 4: improved naming, replaced global pkey reg value with inline helper, made use of Yury's PKEY_UNRESTRICTED macro [7] (suggestions from Dave H).
v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20241023150511.3923558-1-kevin.brod...
v1..v2:
- In setup_rt_frame(), ensured that POR_EL0 is reset to its original value if we fail to deliver the signal (addresses Catalin's concern [6]).
- Renamed *unpriv_access* to *user_access* in patch 3 (suggestion from Dave).
- Made what patch 1-2 do explicit in the commit message body (suggestion from Dave).
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20241017133909.3837547-1-kevin.brod...
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20240822151113.1479789-1-joey.gouly... [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240802061318.2140081-1-aruna.ramakrishna@orac... [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CABi2SkWxNkP2O7ipkP67WKz0-LV33e5brReevTTtba6oKU... [4] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/87plns8owh.fsf@arm.com/ [5] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20241015114116.GA19334@willie-the-t... [6] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/Zw6D2waVyIwYE7wd@arm.com/ [7] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241028090715.509527-2-yury.khrustalev@arm.com/
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: anshuman.khandual@arm.com Cc: aruna.ramakrishna@oracle.com Cc: broonie@kernel.org Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com Cc: dave.hansen@linux.intel.com Cc: Dave.Martin@arm.com Cc: jeffxu@chromium.org Cc: joey.gouly@arm.com Cc: keith.lucas@oracle.com Cc: pierre.langlois@arm.com Cc: shuah@kernel.org Cc: sroettger@google.com Cc: tglx@linutronix.de Cc: will@kernel.org Cc: yury.khrustalev@arm.com Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Cc: x86@kernel.org
Kevin Brodsky (5): arm64: signal: Improve POR_EL0 handling to avoid uaccess failures arm64: signal: Remove unnecessary check when saving POE state arm64: signal: Remove unused macro selftests/mm: Use generic pkey register manipulation selftests/mm: Enable pkey_sighandler_tests on arm64
arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c | 95 ++++++++++++--- tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile | 8 +- tools/testing/selftests/mm/pkey-arm64.h | 1 + tools/testing/selftests/mm/pkey-x86.h | 2 + .../selftests/mm/pkey_sighandler_tests.c | 115 ++++++++++++++---- 5 files changed, 176 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
-- 2.43.0