On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 07:04:32AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 5/12/22 22:33, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> > Thanks Mel, and IIUC nor does do_kern_addr_fault() in arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> > expect _PAGE_PROTNONE instead of _PAGE_GLOBAL. I want to make it clear
> > in the code that _PAGE_PROTNONE is only used for user mappings.
> >
> > How does below look?
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h
> > index 40497a9020c6..f8d02b91a90c 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h
> > @@ -35,7 +35,10 @@
> > #define _PAGE_BIT_DEVMAP _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW4
> >
> > /* If _PAGE_BIT_PRESENT is clear, we use these: */
> > -/* - if the user mapped it with PROT_NONE; pte_present gives true */
> > +/*
> > + * if the user mapped it with PROT_NONE; pte_present gives true
> > + * this is only used for user mappings (with _PAGE_BIT_USER)
> > + */
> > #define _PAGE_BIT_PROTNONE _PAGE_BIT_GLOBAL
> >
> > #define _PAGE_PRESENT (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_PRESENT)
> > @@ -115,7 +118,8 @@
> > #define _PAGE_DEVMAP (_AT(pteval_t, 0))
> > #endif
> >
> > -#define _PAGE_PROTNONE (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_PROTNONE)
> > +#define _PAGE_PROTNONE ((_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_USER) | \
> > + (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_PROTNONE))
> >
> > /*
> > * Set of bits not changed in pte_modify. The pte's
>
> I don't like the idea of _PAGE_BIT_USER being so implicit. It is
> something kernel users should know explicitly that they are messing with.
>
> I was thinking of something more along the lines of taking the
> set_memory.c code and ensuring that it never sets (or even observes)
> _PAGE_BIT_GLOBAL on a _PAGE_USER mapping. There was also a question of
> if set_memory.c is ever used on userspace mappings. It would be good to
> validate whether it's possible in-tree today and if not, enforce that
> _PAGE_USER PTEs should never even be observed with set_memory.c.
Writing code I'm a bit confused:
commit d1440b23c922d8 ("x86/mm: Factor out pageattr
_PAGE_GLOBAL setting") says:
"This unconditional setting of _PAGE_GLOBAL is a problem when we have
PTI and non-PTI and we want some areas to have _PAGE_GLOBAL and some
not."
Is this this sentence not valid anymore in PTI,
and just unconditionally setting _PAGE_GLOBAL would be okay in kernel
side regardless of PTI?
I'm wondering it because previously I thought "Let's not clear
_PAGE_GLOBAL in set_memory.c for kernel mappings and make pmd/pte_present() not
confuse when _PAGE_USER is not set"
But you don't like it as it's a bit implicit.
Then I wonder - how do we know when to set _PAGE_GLOBAL again?
> The arch/x86/mm/dump_pagetables.c code is also a reasonable place to put
> assumptions about the page tables since it walks *everything* when asked.
