Re: [PATCH 1/8] execmem: drop unused execmem_update_copy()

[Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 03:02:15PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 07/07/2025 à 13:49, Mike Rapoport a écrit :
> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 12:10:43PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > > 
> > > Le 04/07/2025 à 15:49, Mike Rapoport a écrit :
> > > > From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <rppt@kernel.org>
> > > > 
> > > > The execmem_update_copy() that used text poking was required when memory
> > > > allocated from ROX cache was always read-only. Since now its permissions
> > > > can be switched to read-write there is no need in a function that updates
> > > > memory with text poking.
> > > 
> > > Erm. Looks like I missed the patch that introduced this change.
> > > 
> > > On some variant of powerpc, namely book3s/32, this is not feasible.
> > 
> > The only user of EXECMEM_ROX_CACHE for now is x86-64, we can always revisit
> > when powerpc book3s/32 would want to opt in to cache usage.
> > 
> > And it seems that [MODULES_VADDR, MODULES_END] is already mapped with
> > "large pages", isn't it?
> 
> I don't think so. It uses execmem_alloc() which sets VM_ALLOW_HUGE_VMAP only
> when using EXECMEM_ROX_CACHE. And book3s/32 doesn't have large pages.
> 
> Only 8xx has large pages but they are not PMD aligned (PMD_SIZE is 4M while
> large pages are 512k and 8M) so it wouldn't work well with existing
> execmem_vmalloc().
 
The PMD_SIZE can be replaced with one of arch_vmap size helpers if needed. 
Or even parametrized in execmem_info.
 
> > > The granularity for setting the NX (non exec) bit is 256 Mbytes sections.
> > > So the area dedicated to execmem [MODULES_VADDR; MODULES_END[ always have
> > > the NX bit unset.
> > > 
> > > You can change any page within this area from ROX to RWX but you can't make
> > > it RW without X. If you want RW without X you must map it in the VMALLOC
> > > area, as VMALLOC area have NX bit always set.
> > 
> > So what will happen when one callse
> > 
> > 	set_memory_nx()
> > 	set_memory_rw()
> > 
> > in such areas?
> 
> Nothing will happen. It will successfully unset the X bit on the PTE but
> that will be ignored by the HW which only relies on the segment's NX bit
> which is set for the entire VMALLOC area and unset for the entire MODULE
> area.

And set_memory_rw() will essentially make the mapping RWX if it's in MODULE
area?
 
> Christophe
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.