[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] Use C inlines for uaccess

Pavel Tatashin posted 3 patches 2 weeks ago
Failed in applying to current master (apply log)
arch/arm/include/asm/assembler.h       |  2 +-
arch/arm/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h   | 10 +++++
arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c               |  2 +-
arch/arm/xen/hypercall.S               |  4 +-
arch/arm64/include/asm/asm-uaccess.h   | 60 --------------------------
arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h    | 38 ++++++++++++++--
arch/arm64/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h | 28 ++++++++++++
arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S              |  6 +--
arch/arm64/lib/clear_user.S            |  2 +-
arch/arm64/lib/copy_from_user.S        |  2 +-
arch/arm64/lib/copy_in_user.S          |  2 +-
arch/arm64/lib/copy_to_user.S          |  2 +-
arch/arm64/mm/cache.S                  | 31 +++++--------
arch/arm64/mm/context.c                | 12 ++++++
arch/arm64/mm/flush.c                  |  2 +-
arch/arm64/xen/hypercall.S             | 19 +-------
include/xen/arm/hypercall.h            | 12 +++---
17 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 119 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/asm-uaccess.h

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] Use C inlines for uaccess

Posted by Pavel Tatashin 2 weeks ago
Changelog
v2:
	- Addressed Russell King's concern by not adding
	  uaccess_* to ARM.
	- Removed the accidental change to xtensa

Convert the remaining uaccess_* calls from ASM macros to C inlines.

These patches apply against linux-next. I boot tested ARM64, and
compile tested ARM changes.

Pavel Tatashin (3):
  arm/arm64/xen: use C inlines for privcmd_call
  arm64: remove uaccess_ttbr0 asm macros from cache functions
  arm64: remove the rest of asm-uaccess.h

 arch/arm/include/asm/assembler.h       |  2 +-
 arch/arm/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h   | 10 +++++
 arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c               |  2 +-
 arch/arm/xen/hypercall.S               |  4 +-
 arch/arm64/include/asm/asm-uaccess.h   | 60 --------------------------
 arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h    | 38 ++++++++++++++--
 arch/arm64/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h | 28 ++++++++++++
 arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S              |  6 +--
 arch/arm64/lib/clear_user.S            |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/lib/copy_from_user.S        |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/lib/copy_in_user.S          |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/lib/copy_to_user.S          |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/mm/cache.S                  | 31 +++++--------
 arch/arm64/mm/context.c                | 12 ++++++
 arch/arm64/mm/flush.c                  |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/xen/hypercall.S             | 19 +-------
 include/xen/arm/hypercall.h            | 12 +++---
 17 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 119 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/asm-uaccess.h

-- 
2.24.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] Use C inlines for uaccess

Posted by Pavel Tatashin 1 week ago
Kees Cook mentioned that it is a good idea to assert the PAN state
during disable/enable. Since, with this change everything is moved to
the same C place, if this hardening is something others also want to
see, I could add it in the next revision of this series. Here are the
options to choose from:
1. Do something similar to what is done in preempt with
CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT:  keep a boolean (could be optionally enabled by
a config) that is checked when uaccess_enable()/uaccess_disable() are
called. This way we will always check that state even on processors
with hardware PAN and UAO, however, there is going to be this extra
overhead of checking/storing the variable on userland enter/exits even
on systems which have these marcos set to nothing otherwise.
2. Check only in __uaccess_ttbr0_disable()/__uaccess_ttbr0_enable()
that ttbr0_el1 is in the expected state, or add another boolean  for
this purpose to thread_info.
3. Keep as is, and do not add extra overhead for this hardening.

Thank you,
Pasha

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 9:24 PM Pavel Tatashin
<pasha.tatashin@soleen.com> wrote:
>
> Changelog
> v2:
>         - Addressed Russell King's concern by not adding
>           uaccess_* to ARM.
>         - Removed the accidental change to xtensa
>
> Convert the remaining uaccess_* calls from ASM macros to C inlines.
>
> These patches apply against linux-next. I boot tested ARM64, and
> compile tested ARM changes.
>
> Pavel Tatashin (3):
>   arm/arm64/xen: use C inlines for privcmd_call
>   arm64: remove uaccess_ttbr0 asm macros from cache functions
>   arm64: remove the rest of asm-uaccess.h
>
>  arch/arm/include/asm/assembler.h       |  2 +-
>  arch/arm/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h   | 10 +++++
>  arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c               |  2 +-
>  arch/arm/xen/hypercall.S               |  4 +-
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/asm-uaccess.h   | 60 --------------------------
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h    | 38 ++++++++++++++--
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h | 28 ++++++++++++
>  arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S              |  6 +--
>  arch/arm64/lib/clear_user.S            |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/lib/copy_from_user.S        |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/lib/copy_in_user.S          |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/lib/copy_to_user.S          |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/mm/cache.S                  | 31 +++++--------
>  arch/arm64/mm/context.c                | 12 ++++++
>  arch/arm64/mm/flush.c                  |  2 +-
>  arch/arm64/xen/hypercall.S             | 19 +-------
>  include/xen/arm/hypercall.h            | 12 +++---
>  17 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 119 deletions(-)
>  delete mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/asm-uaccess.h
>
> --
> 2.24.0
>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel