Re: [RFC PATCH] arm64: mm: Map fixmap PTE tables r/o in the linear map

["Ard Biesheuvel" <ardb@kernel.org>]

On Thu, 27 Aug 2026, at 10:55, Kevin Brodsky wrote:
> On 26/08/2026 11:07, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> +static int __init fixmap_remap_ro(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	return set_direct_map_ro((unsigned long)lm_alias(&bm_pte), NR_BM_PTE_TABLES);
>>> Should we not also remap bm_pmd and bm_pud?
>>>
>>> For that matter, do we need RW access via the linear map for any page
>>> annotated with __bss_pgtbl? I suppose that might be the case for
>>> kasan_early_shadow_* but I don't know enough about KASAN to tell for sure.
>>>
>> bm_pte[] is special because it is only ever written via the kernel mapping,
>> and never via the linear map. This is why it is being singled out in this
>> patch.
>
> Right I see __set_fixmap(). This is a very special case of calling
> __set_pte() on a pointer derived from a global (i.e. pointing to the
> kernel image and not the LM) so it makes sense to treat it differently.
>
> I do wonder whether there is that much value in protecting bm_pte while
> all page tables in init_pg_dir (also at a fixed offset in the LM) remain
> writeable though.
>

Yes, so those need to be taken care of as well.

> Either way all this is interesting for my series protecting page tables
> with pkeys [1] - it seems that to protect the fixmap, the easiest option
> would be to change the pkey of .pgtlb in both the kernel image and LM
> (the former for bm_pte, and the latter for everything else).
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260818-kpkeys-v9-0-743ad31b2c8f@arm.com/
>

Thanks, I've been meaning to go through those but they are a bit overwhelming :-)

>> Whether or not bm_pmd[] can be treated as a special case depends on the page
>> size: with 4k pages, the whole array covers a virtual region of 1G, which is
>> currently guaranteed to be shared only with the PCI I/O space (but we could
>> move that out). With 16k pages, it covers 64G, and so it is shared with the
>> vmemmap and other virtual mappings in the vmalloc region, and so the current
>> kernel mapping code expects to be able to write those entries.
>>
>> What we might do is generalize the logic that uses the fixmap to modify
>> pgd level entries in swapper_pg_dir, and use it for all modifications
>> at PMD level or higher if those tables are in .rodata
>>
>> But this is a bit more complicated than this change, so I decided to
>> present this as a separate change.
>
> Definitely, this is orthogonal to this patch. I wonder what the
> performance impact would be if we used the fixmap for setting all kernel
> entries at PMD and above. It would be nice to keep that logic easily
> togglable, because with the kpkeys approach I mentioned above we have a
> (most likely) much cheaper way of protecting these page tables.
>

I'm currently experimenting with using __put_kernel_nofault() to update
the descriptors at all levels (including PTE) and handling the fault
using the fixmap approach. That way, all statically allocated page
tables could move to .rodata (except bm_pte[]) and there should be no
substantial performance impact.

>>>> +}
>>>> +late_initcall(fixmap_remap_ro);
>>> Is mark_rodata_ro() definitely too early to remap these pages RO?
>>>
>> No, we might just call this from there, afaict.
>
> Sounds good, could we then use update_mapping_prot()? I suppose not as
> that would require mapping bm_pte separately in map_mem()?
>

Yeah, but perhaps we should do the latter anyway, so we can remap the
region even if !can_set_direct_map().