From: daniel@iogearbox.net (Daniel Borkmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: Allow vmalloc regions to be set with set_memory_*
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 01:31:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56959AD8.90206@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160113000112.GA36310@ast-mbp.thefacebook.com>
On 01/13/2016 01:01 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 01:46:27PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>
>> The range of set_memory_* is currently restricted to the module address
>> range because of difficulties in breaking down larger block sizes.
>> vmalloc maps PAGE_SIZE pages so it is safe to use as well. Update the
>> function ranges and add a comment explaining why the range is restricted
>> the way it is.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <labbott@fedoraproject.org>
>> ---
>> This should let the protections for the eBPF work as expected, I don't
>> know if there is some sort of self test for thatL.
>
> you can test it with:
> # sysctl net.core.bpf_jit_enable=1
> # insmod test_bpf.ko
>
> On x64 it shows:
> test_bpf: Summary: 291 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [282/283 JIT'ed]
>
> arm64 may have less JIT'ed tests.
Also, in that lib/test_bpf.c file, you can do a test by overwriting/'corrupting'
part of the fp->insnsi instructions right after bpf_prog_select_runtime(fp) to
see if setting the bpf_prog as RO works.
Thanks,
Daniel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Laura Abbott <labbott@fedoraproject.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Allow vmalloc regions to be set with set_memory_*
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 01:31:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56959AD8.90206@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160113000112.GA36310@ast-mbp.thefacebook.com>
On 01/13/2016 01:01 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 01:46:27PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>
>> The range of set_memory_* is currently restricted to the module address
>> range because of difficulties in breaking down larger block sizes.
>> vmalloc maps PAGE_SIZE pages so it is safe to use as well. Update the
>> function ranges and add a comment explaining why the range is restricted
>> the way it is.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <labbott@fedoraproject.org>
>> ---
>> This should let the protections for the eBPF work as expected, I don't
>> know if there is some sort of self test for thatL.
>
> you can test it with:
> # sysctl net.core.bpf_jit_enable=1
> # insmod test_bpf.ko
>
> On x64 it shows:
> test_bpf: Summary: 291 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [282/283 JIT'ed]
>
> arm64 may have less JIT'ed tests.
Also, in that lib/test_bpf.c file, you can do a test by overwriting/'corrupting'
part of the fp->insnsi instructions right after bpf_prog_select_runtime(fp) to
see if setting the bpf_prog as RO works.
Thanks,
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-13 0:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-12 21:46 [PATCH] arm64: Allow vmalloc regions to be set with set_memory_* Laura Abbott
2016-01-12 21:46 ` Laura Abbott
2016-01-13 0:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2016-01-13 0:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2016-01-13 0:31 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2016-01-13 0:31 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-01-13 14:03 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-13 14:03 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-13 16:10 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-13 16:10 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-14 23:01 ` Laura Abbott
2016-01-14 23:01 ` Laura Abbott
2016-01-18 11:56 ` Mark Rutland
2016-01-18 11:56 ` Mark Rutland
2016-01-28 1:47 ` Xishi Qiu
2016-01-28 1:47 ` Xishi Qiu
2016-01-28 10:51 ` Mark Rutland
2016-01-28 10:51 ` Mark Rutland
2016-01-28 11:47 ` Xishi Qiu
2016-01-28 11:47 ` Xishi Qiu
2016-01-28 14:27 ` Mark Rutland
2016-01-28 14:27 ` Mark Rutland
2016-01-29 1:21 ` Xishi Qiu
2016-01-29 1:21 ` Xishi Qiu
2016-01-29 11:02 ` Mark Rutland
2016-01-29 11:02 ` Mark Rutland
2016-01-30 2:48 ` Xishi Qiu
2016-01-30 2:48 ` Xishi Qiu
2016-02-03 13:43 ` Mark Rutland
2016-02-03 13:43 ` Mark Rutland
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-01-18 14:01 [PATCH] arm64: allow " Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-18 15:05 ` Mark Rutland
2016-01-28 15:08 ` Will Deacon
2016-01-28 16:40 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-28 16:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-01-28 18:10 ` Will Deacon
2016-01-28 19:07 ` Ard Biesheuvel
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=56959AD8.90206@iogearbox.net \
--to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.