On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 8:59 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 1:57 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > We want all iomem mmaps to consistently revoke ptes when the kernel > > takes over and CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM is enabled. This includes the > > pci bar mmaps available through procfs and sysfs, which currently do > > not revoke mappings. > > > > To prepare for this, move the code from the /dev/kmem driver to > > kernel/resource.c. > > > > Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> > > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx > > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: linux-samsung-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx> > > -- > > v3: > > - add barrier for consistency and document why we don't have to check > > for NULL (Jason) > > --- > > drivers/char/mem.c | 85 +--------------------------------- > > include/linux/ioport.h | 6 +-- > > kernel/resource.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > 3 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 90 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/char/mem.c b/drivers/char/mem.c > > index 5502f56f3655..53338aad8d28 100644 > > --- a/drivers/char/mem.c > > +++ b/drivers/char/mem.c > > @@ -31,9 +31,6 @@ > > #include <linux/uio.h> > > #include <linux/uaccess.h> > > #include <linux/security.h> > > -#include <linux/pseudo_fs.h> > > -#include <uapi/linux/magic.h> > > -#include <linux/mount.h> > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_IA64 > > # include <linux/efi.h> > > @@ -809,42 +806,6 @@ static loff_t memory_lseek(struct file *file, loff_t offset, int orig) > > return ret; > > } > > > > -static struct inode *devmem_inode; > > - > > -#ifdef CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM > > -void revoke_devmem(struct resource *res) > > -{ > > - /* pairs with smp_store_release() in devmem_init_inode() */ > > - struct inode *inode = smp_load_acquire(&devmem_inode); > > - > > - /* > > - * Check that the initialization has completed. Losing the race > > - * is ok because it means drivers are claiming resources before > > - * the fs_initcall level of init and prevent /dev/mem from > > - * establishing mappings. > > - */ > > - if (!inode) > > - return; > > - > > - /* > > - * The expectation is that the driver has successfully marked > > - * the resource busy by this point, so devmem_is_allowed() > > - * should start returning false, however for performance this > > - * does not iterate the entire resource range. > > - */ > > - if (devmem_is_allowed(PHYS_PFN(res->start)) && > > - devmem_is_allowed(PHYS_PFN(res->end))) { > > - /* > > - * *cringe* iomem=relaxed says "go ahead, what's the > > - * worst that can happen?" > > - */ > > - return; > > - } > > - > > - unmap_mapping_range(inode->i_mapping, res->start, resource_size(res), 1); > > -} > > -#endif > > - > > static int open_port(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp) > > { > > int rc; > > @@ -864,7 +825,7 @@ static int open_port(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp) > > * revocations when drivers want to take over a /dev/mem mapped > > * range. > > */ > > - filp->f_mapping = inode->i_mapping; > > + filp->f_mapping = iomem_get_mapping(); > > > > return 0; > > } > > @@ -995,48 +956,6 @@ static char *mem_devnode(struct device *dev, umode_t *mode) > > > > static struct class *mem_class; > > > > -static int devmem_fs_init_fs_context(struct fs_context *fc) > > -{ > > - return init_pseudo(fc, DEVMEM_MAGIC) ? 0 : -ENOMEM; > > -} > > - > > -static struct file_system_type devmem_fs_type = { > > - .name = "devmem", > > - .owner = THIS_MODULE, > > - .init_fs_context = devmem_fs_init_fs_context, > > - .kill_sb = kill_anon_super, > > -}; > > - > > -static int devmem_init_inode(void) > > -{ > > - static struct vfsmount *devmem_vfs_mount; > > - static int devmem_fs_cnt; > > - struct inode *inode; > > - int rc; > > - > > - rc = simple_pin_fs(&devmem_fs_type, &devmem_vfs_mount, &devmem_fs_cnt); > > - if (rc < 0) { > > - pr_err("Cannot mount /dev/mem pseudo filesystem: %d\n", rc); > > - return rc; > > - } > > - > > - inode = alloc_anon_inode(devmem_vfs_mount->mnt_sb); > > - if (IS_ERR(inode)) { > > - rc = PTR_ERR(inode); > > - pr_err("Cannot allocate inode for /dev/mem: %d\n", rc); > > - simple_release_fs(&devmem_vfs_mount, &devmem_fs_cnt); > > - return rc; > > - } > > - > > - /* > > - * Publish /dev/mem initialized. > > - * Pairs with smp_load_acquire() in revoke_devmem(). > > - */ > > - smp_store_release(&devmem_inode, inode); > > - > > - return 0; > > -} > > - > > static int __init chr_dev_init(void) > > { > > int minor; > > @@ -1058,8 +977,6 @@ static int __init chr_dev_init(void) > > */ > > if ((minor == DEVPORT_MINOR) && !arch_has_dev_port()) > > continue; > > - if ((minor == DEVMEM_MINOR) && devmem_init_inode() != 0) > > - continue; > > > > device_create(mem_class, NULL, MKDEV(MEM_MAJOR, minor), > > NULL, devlist[minor].name); > > diff --git a/include/linux/ioport.h b/include/linux/ioport.h > > index 6c2b06fe8beb..8ffb61b36606 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/ioport.h > > +++ b/include/linux/ioport.h > > @@ -302,11 +302,7 @@ struct resource *devm_request_free_mem_region(struct device *dev, > > struct resource *request_free_mem_region(struct resource *base, > > unsigned long size, const char *name); > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM > > -void revoke_devmem(struct resource *res); > > -#else > > -static inline void revoke_devmem(struct resource *res) { }; > > -#endif > > +extern struct address_space *iomem_get_mapping(void); > > > > #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */ > > #endif /* _LINUX_IOPORT_H */ > > diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c > > index 841737bbda9e..a92fed5b9997 100644 > > --- a/kernel/resource.c > > +++ b/kernel/resource.c > > @@ -18,12 +18,15 @@ > > #include <linux/spinlock.h> > > #include <linux/fs.h> > > #include <linux/proc_fs.h> > > +#include <linux/pseudo_fs.h> > > #include <linux/sched.h> > > #include <linux/seq_file.h> > > #include <linux/device.h> > > #include <linux/pfn.h> > > #include <linux/mm.h> > > +#include <linux/mount.h> > > #include <linux/resource_ext.h> > > +#include <uapi/linux/magic.h> > > #include <asm/io.h> > > > > > > @@ -1112,6 +1115,58 @@ resource_size_t resource_alignment(struct resource *res) > > > > static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(muxed_resource_wait); > > > > +static struct inode *iomem_inode; > > + > > +#ifdef CONFIG_IO_STRICT_DEVMEM > > +static void revoke_iomem(struct resource *res) > > +{ > > + /* pairs with smp_store_release() in iomem_init_inode() */ > > + struct inode *inode = smp_load_acquire(&iomem_inode); > > + > > + /* > > + * Check that the initialization has completed. Losing the race > > + * is ok because it means drivers are claiming resources before > > + * the fs_initcall level of init and prevent /dev/mem from > > How about: > > s,/dev/mem,iomem_get_mapping() users, > > ...now that this facility is generalized? > > > + * establishing mappings. > > + */ > > + if (!inode) > > + return; > > + > > + /* > > + * The expectation is that the driver has successfully marked > > + * the resource busy by this point, so devmem_is_allowed() > > + * should start returning false, however for performance this > > + * does not iterate the entire resource range. > > + */ > > + if (devmem_is_allowed(PHYS_PFN(res->start)) && > > + devmem_is_allowed(PHYS_PFN(res->end))) { > > + /* > > + * *cringe* iomem=relaxed says "go ahead, what's the > > + * worst that can happen?" > > + */ > > + return; > > + } > > + > > + unmap_mapping_range(inode->i_mapping, res->start, resource_size(res), 1); > > +} > > +struct address_space *iomem_get_mapping(void) > > +{ > > + /* > > + * This function is only called from file open paths, hence guaranteed > > + * that fs_initcalls have completed and no need to check for NULL. But > > + * since revoke_iomem can be called before the initcall we still need > > + * the barrier to appease checkers. > > + */ > > + return smp_load_acquire(&iomem_inode)->i_mapping; > > +} > > +#else > > +static void revoke_iomem(struct resource *res) {} > > +struct address_space *iomem_get_mapping(void) > > +{ > > + return NULL; > > +} > > +#endif > > + > > /** > > * __request_region - create a new busy resource region > > * @parent: parent resource descriptor > > @@ -1179,7 +1234,7 @@ struct resource * __request_region(struct resource *parent, > > write_unlock(&resource_lock); > > > > if (res && orig_parent == &iomem_resource) > > - revoke_devmem(res); > > + revoke_iomem(res); > > > > return res; > > } > > @@ -1713,4 +1768,48 @@ static int __init strict_iomem(char *str) > > return 1; > > } > > > > +static int iomem_fs_init_fs_context(struct fs_context *fc) > > +{ > > + return init_pseudo(fc, DEVMEM_MAGIC) ? 0 : -ENOMEM; > > +} > > + > > +static struct file_system_type iomem_fs_type = { > > + .name = "iomem", > > + .owner = THIS_MODULE, > > + .init_fs_context = iomem_fs_init_fs_context, > > + .kill_sb = kill_anon_super, > > +}; > > + > > +static int __init iomem_init_inode(void) > > +{ > > + static struct vfsmount *iomem_vfs_mount; > > + static int iomem_fs_cnt; > > + struct inode *inode; > > + int rc; > > + > > + rc = simple_pin_fs(&iomem_fs_type, &iomem_vfs_mount, &iomem_fs_cnt); > > + if (rc < 0) { > > + pr_err("Cannot mount iomem pseudo filesystem: %d\n", rc); > > + return rc; > > + } > > + > > + inode = alloc_anon_inode(iomem_vfs_mount->mnt_sb); > > + if (IS_ERR(inode)) { > > + rc = PTR_ERR(inode); > > + pr_err("Cannot allocate inode for iomem: %d\n", rc); > > + simple_release_fs(&iomem_vfs_mount, &iomem_fs_cnt); > > + return rc; > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * Publish /dev/mem initialized. > > Similar potential fixup: > > "Publish iomem revocation inode initialized" Yeah makes sense I fix up the comments, I'll do that in v4. Need to fix up my mangeld sob line anyway :-) Thanks for taking a careful look at this! Cheers, Daniel > Other than that: > > Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch