All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
	khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	bsingharora@gmail.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, hbabu@us.ibm.com,
	linuxram@us.ibm.com
Subject: [RFC v2 11/12]Documentation: Documentation updates.
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:52:43 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1497671564-20030-12-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1497671564-20030-1-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com>

The Documentaton file is moved from x86 into the generic area,
since this feature is now supported by more than one archs.

Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
---
 Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt  | 110 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt |  85 --------------------------
 2 files changed, 110 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt
 delete mode 100644 Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt b/Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b49e6bb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/vm/protection-keys.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+Memory Protection Keys for Userspace (PKU aka PKEYs) is a CPU feature
+found in new generation of intel CPUs on PowerPC CPUs.
+
+Memory Protection Keys provides a mechanism for enforcing page-based
+protections, but without requiring modification of the page tables
+when an application changes protection domains.
+
+
+On Intel:
+
+It works by dedicating 4 previously ignored bits in each page table
+entry to a "protection key", giving 16 possible keys.
+
+There is also a new user-accessible register (PKRU) with two separate
+bits (Access Disable and Write Disable) for each key.  Being a CPU
+register, PKRU is inherently thread-local, potentially giving each
+thread a different set of protections from every other thread.
+
+There are two new instructions (RDPKRU/WRPKRU) for reading and writing
+to the new register.  The feature is only available in 64-bit mode,
+even though there is theoretically space in the PAE PTEs.  These
+permissions are enforced on data access only and have no effect on
+instruction fetches.
+
+
+On PowerPC:
+
+It works by dedicating 5 page table entry to a "protection key",
+giving 32 possible keys.
+
+There is a user-accessible register (AMR) with two separate bits
+(Access Disable and Write Disable) for each key.  Being a CPU
+register, AMR is inherently thread-local, potentially giving each
+thread a different set of protections from every other thread.
+NOTE: Disabling read permission does not disable
+write and vice-versa.
+
+The feature is available on 64-bit HPTE mode only.
+
+'mtspr 0xd, mem' reads the AMR register
+'mfspr mem, 0xd' writes into the AMR register.
+
+Permissions are enforced on data access only and have no effect on
+instruction fetches.
+
+=========================== Syscalls ===========================
+
+There are 3 system calls which directly interact with pkeys:
+
+	int pkey_alloc(unsigned long flags, unsigned long init_access_rights)
+	int pkey_free(int pkey);
+	int pkey_mprotect(unsigned long start, size_t len,
+			  unsigned long prot, int pkey);
+
+Before a pkey can be used, it must first be allocated with
+pkey_alloc().  An application calls the WRPKRU instruction
+directly in order to change access permissions to memory covered
+with a key.  In this example WRPKRU is wrapped by a C function
+called pkey_set().
+
+	int real_prot = PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE;
+	pkey = pkey_alloc(0, PKEY_DENY_WRITE);
+	ptr = mmap(NULL, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_NONE, MAP_ANONYMOUS|MAP_PRIVATE, -1, 0);
+	ret = pkey_mprotect(ptr, PAGE_SIZE, real_prot, pkey);
+	... application runs here
+
+Now, if the application needs to update the data at 'ptr', it can
+gain access, do the update, then remove its write access:
+
+	pkey_set(pkey, 0); // clear PKEY_DENY_WRITE
+	*ptr = foo; // assign something
+	pkey_set(pkey, PKEY_DENY_WRITE); // set PKEY_DENY_WRITE again
+
+Now when it frees the memory, it will also free the pkey since it
+is no longer in use:
+
+	munmap(ptr, PAGE_SIZE);
+	pkey_free(pkey);
+
+(Note: pkey_set() is a wrapper for the RDPKRU and WRPKRU instructions.
+ An example implementation can be found in
+ tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c)
+
+=========================== Behavior ===========================
+
+The kernel attempts to make protection keys consistent with the
+behavior of a plain mprotect().  For instance if you do this:
+
+	mprotect(ptr, size, PROT_NONE);
+	something(ptr);
+
+you can expect the same effects with protection keys when doing this:
+
+	pkey = pkey_alloc(0, PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE | PKEY_DISABLE_READ);
+	pkey_mprotect(ptr, size, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, pkey);
+	something(ptr);
+
+That should be true whether something() is a direct access to 'ptr'
+like:
+
+	*ptr = foo;
+
+or when the kernel does the access on the application's behalf like
+with a read():
+
+	read(fd, ptr, 1);
+
+The kernel will send a SIGSEGV in both cases, but si_code will be set
+to SEGV_PKERR when violating protection keys versus SEGV_ACCERR when
+the plain mprotect() permissions are violated.
diff --git a/Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt b/Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index b643045..0000000
--- a/Documentation/x86/protection-keys.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,85 +0,0 @@
-Memory Protection Keys for Userspace (PKU aka PKEYs) is a CPU feature
-which will be found on future Intel CPUs.
-
-Memory Protection Keys provides a mechanism for enforcing page-based
-protections, but without requiring modification of the page tables
-when an application changes protection domains.  It works by
-dedicating 4 previously ignored bits in each page table entry to a
-"protection key", giving 16 possible keys.
-
-There is also a new user-accessible register (PKRU) with two separate
-bits (Access Disable and Write Disable) for each key.  Being a CPU
-register, PKRU is inherently thread-local, potentially giving each
-thread a different set of protections from every other thread.
-
-There are two new instructions (RDPKRU/WRPKRU) for reading and writing
-to the new register.  The feature is only available in 64-bit mode,
-even though there is theoretically space in the PAE PTEs.  These
-permissions are enforced on data access only and have no effect on
-instruction fetches.
-
-=========================== Syscalls ===========================
-
-There are 3 system calls which directly interact with pkeys:
-
-	int pkey_alloc(unsigned long flags, unsigned long init_access_rights)
-	int pkey_free(int pkey);
-	int pkey_mprotect(unsigned long start, size_t len,
-			  unsigned long prot, int pkey);
-
-Before a pkey can be used, it must first be allocated with
-pkey_alloc().  An application calls the WRPKRU instruction
-directly in order to change access permissions to memory covered
-with a key.  In this example WRPKRU is wrapped by a C function
-called pkey_set().
-
-	int real_prot = PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE;
-	pkey = pkey_alloc(0, PKEY_DENY_WRITE);
-	ptr = mmap(NULL, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_NONE, MAP_ANONYMOUS|MAP_PRIVATE, -1, 0);
-	ret = pkey_mprotect(ptr, PAGE_SIZE, real_prot, pkey);
-	... application runs here
-
-Now, if the application needs to update the data at 'ptr', it can
-gain access, do the update, then remove its write access:
-
-	pkey_set(pkey, 0); // clear PKEY_DENY_WRITE
-	*ptr = foo; // assign something
-	pkey_set(pkey, PKEY_DENY_WRITE); // set PKEY_DENY_WRITE again
-
-Now when it frees the memory, it will also free the pkey since it
-is no longer in use:
-
-	munmap(ptr, PAGE_SIZE);
-	pkey_free(pkey);
-
-(Note: pkey_set() is a wrapper for the RDPKRU and WRPKRU instructions.
- An example implementation can be found in
- tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c)
-
-=========================== Behavior ===========================
-
-The kernel attempts to make protection keys consistent with the
-behavior of a plain mprotect().  For instance if you do this:
-
-	mprotect(ptr, size, PROT_NONE);
-	something(ptr);
-
-you can expect the same effects with protection keys when doing this:
-
-	pkey = pkey_alloc(0, PKEY_DISABLE_WRITE | PKEY_DISABLE_READ);
-	pkey_mprotect(ptr, size, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, pkey);
-	something(ptr);
-
-That should be true whether something() is a direct access to 'ptr'
-like:
-
-	*ptr = foo;
-
-or when the kernel does the access on the application's behalf like
-with a read():
-
-	read(fd, ptr, 1);
-
-The kernel will send a SIGSEGV in both cases, but si_code will be set
-to SEGV_PKERR when violating protection keys versus SEGV_ACCERR when
-the plain mprotect() permissions are violated.
-- 
1.8.3.1

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-06-17  3:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-17  3:52 [RFC v2 00/12] powerpc: Memory Protection Keys Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 01/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 4K backed hpte pages Ram Pai
2017-06-20 10:20   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:23     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  5:35       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  6:34         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  6:41   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21  9:30     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-22  9:07   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-22 16:20     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 02/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 64K " Ram Pai
2017-06-20 10:51   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:25     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  6:50   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21  6:54   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21 20:14     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 03/12] powerpc: Implement sys_pkey_alloc and sys_pkey_free system call Ram Pai
2017-06-19 12:18   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-20 22:45     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 04/12] powerpc: store and restore the pkey state across context switches Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 05/12] powerpc: Implementation for sys_mprotect_pkey() system call Ram Pai
2017-06-21  7:16   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 06/12] powerpc: Program HPTE key protection bits Ram Pai
2017-06-20  8:21   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:26     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 07/12] powerpc: Macro the mask used for checking DSI exception Ram Pai
2017-06-20  8:14   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:28     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  7:25   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21  9:17     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 08/12] powerpc: Handle exceptions caused by violation of pkey protection Ram Pai
2017-06-20  7:24   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:43     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  3:54       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  6:26         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 09/12] powerpc: Deliver SEGV signal on pkey violation Ram Pai
2017-06-20  6:54   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:56     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  3:18       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  6:10         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 10/12] powerpc: Read AMR only if pkey-violation caused the exception Ram Pai
2017-06-19 11:06   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-19 17:59     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20  6:46       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:58         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20 23:56     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` Ram Pai [this message]
2017-06-20  6:18   ` [RFC v2 11/12]Documentation: Documentation updates Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  0:04     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 12/12]selftest: Updated protection key selftest Ram Pai
2017-06-19 11:04   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-20  6:26   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  0:10     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20  5:10 ` [RFC v2 00/12] powerpc: Memory Protection Keys Balbir Singh
2017-06-20  6:05   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20  9:56   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1497671564-20030-12-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com \
    --to=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=hbabu@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.