linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: why2jjj.linux@gmail.com (J Freyensee)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 7/7] Documentation for Pmalloc
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:26:49 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <98b2fecf-c1b3-aa5e-ba70-2770940bb965@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180223144807.1180-8-igor.stoppa@huawei.com>



On 2/23/18 6:48 AM, Igor Stoppa wrote:
> Detailed documentation about the protectable memory allocator.
>
> Signed-off-by: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@huawei.com>
> ---
>   Documentation/core-api/index.rst   |   1 +
>   Documentation/core-api/pmalloc.rst | 114 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   2 files changed, 115 insertions(+)
>   create mode 100644 Documentation/core-api/pmalloc.rst
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/core-api/index.rst b/Documentation/core-api/index.rst
> index c670a8031786..8f5de42d6571 100644
> --- a/Documentation/core-api/index.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/core-api/index.rst
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ Core utilities
>      genalloc
>      errseq
>      printk-formats
> +   pmalloc
>   
>   Interfaces for kernel debugging
>   ===============================
> diff --git a/Documentation/core-api/pmalloc.rst b/Documentation/core-api/pmalloc.rst
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..d9725870444e
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/core-api/pmalloc.rst
> @@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +
> +Protectable memory allocator
> +============================
> +
> +Purpose
> +-------
> +
> +The pmalloc library is meant to provide R/O status to data that, for some
> +reason, could neither be declared as constant, nor could it take advantage
> +of the qualifier __ro_after_init, but is write-once and read-only in spirit.
> +It protects data from both accidental and malicious overwrites.
> +
> +Example: A policy that is loaded from userspace.
> +
> +
> +Concept
> +-------
> +
> +pmalloc builds on top of genalloc, using the same concept of memory pools.
> +
> +The value added by pmalloc is that now the memory contained in a pool can
> +become R/O, for the rest of the life of the pool.
> +
> +Different kernel drivers and threads can use different pools, for finer
> +control of what becomes R/O and when. And for improved lockless concurrency.
> +
> +
> +Caveats
> +-------
> +
> +- Memory freed while a pool is not yet protected will be reused.
> +
> +- Once a pool is protected, it's not possible to allocate any more memory
> +  from it.
> +
> +- Memory "freed" from a protected pool indicates that such memory is not
> +  in use anymore by the requester; however, it will not become available
> +  for further use, until the pool is destroyed.
> +
> +- Before destroying a pool, all the memory allocated from it must be
> +  released.

Is that true?? pmalloc_destroy_pool() has:

.
.
+??? pmalloc_pool_set_protection(pool, false);
+??? gen_pool_for_each_chunk(pool, pmalloc_chunk_free, NULL);
+??? gen_pool_destroy(pool);
+??? kfree(data);

which to me looks like is the opposite, the data (ie, "memory") is being 
released first, then the pool is destroyed.



> +
> +- pmalloc does not provide locking support with respect to allocating vs
> +  protecting an individual pool, for performance reasons.

What is the recommendation to using locks then, as the computing 
real-world mainly operates in multi-threaded/process world?? Maybe show 
an example of an issue that occur if locks aren't used and give a coding 
example.

> +  It is recommended not to share the same pool between unrelated functions.
> +  Should sharing be a necessity, the user of the shared pool is expected
> +  to implement locking for that pool.
> +
> +- pmalloc uses genalloc to optimize the use of the space it allocates
> +  through vmalloc. Some more TLB entries will be used, however less than
> +  in the case of using vmalloc directly. The exact number depends on the
> +  size of each allocation request and possible slack.
> +
> +- Considering that not much data is supposed to be dynamically allocated
> +  and then marked as read-only, it shouldn't be an issue that the address
> +  range for pmalloc is limited, on 32-bit systems.

Why is 32-bit systems mentioned and not 64-bit?? Is there a problem with 
64-bit here?

Thanks,
Jay
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-24  0:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-23 14:48 [RFC PATCH v17 0/7] mm: security: ro protection for dynamic data Igor Stoppa
2018-02-23 14:48 ` [PATCH 1/7] genalloc: track beginning of allocations Igor Stoppa
2018-02-23 22:28   ` J Freyensee
2018-02-26 12:09     ` Igor Stoppa
2018-02-26 17:32       ` J Freyensee
2018-02-26 18:44         ` Igor Stoppa
2018-02-25  3:37   ` kbuild test robot
2018-02-23 14:48 ` [PATCH 2/7] genalloc: selftest Igor Stoppa
2018-02-23 22:42   ` J Freyensee
2018-02-26 12:11     ` Igor Stoppa
2018-02-26 17:46       ` J Freyensee
2018-02-26 18:00         ` Igor Stoppa
2018-02-26 19:12           ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-02-26 19:26             ` Igor Stoppa
2018-02-23 14:48 ` [PATCH 3/7] struct page: add field for vm_struct Igor Stoppa
2018-02-25  3:38   ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-02-26 16:37     ` Igor Stoppa
2018-02-23 14:48 ` [PATCH 4/7] Protectable Memory Igor Stoppa
2018-02-24  0:10   ` J Freyensee
2018-02-26 14:28     ` Igor Stoppa
2018-02-26 18:25       ` J Freyensee
2018-02-25  2:33   ` kbuild test robot
2018-02-23 14:48 ` [PATCH 5/7] Pmalloc selftest Igor Stoppa
2018-03-06 16:59   ` J Freyensee
2018-02-23 14:48 ` [PATCH 6/7] lkdtm: crash on overwriting protected pmalloc var Igor Stoppa
2018-02-25  3:46   ` kbuild test robot
2018-03-06 17:05   ` J Freyensee
2018-03-06 17:08     ` J Freyensee
2018-02-23 14:48 ` [PATCH 7/7] Documentation for Pmalloc Igor Stoppa
2018-02-24  0:26   ` J Freyensee [this message]
2018-02-26 15:39     ` Igor Stoppa
2018-02-26 18:32       ` J Freyensee
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-02-28 20:06 [RFC PATCH v18 0/7] mm: security: ro protection for dynamic data Igor Stoppa
2018-02-28 20:06 ` [PATCH 7/7] Documentation for Pmalloc Igor Stoppa
2018-03-06 13:30   ` Mike Rapoport
2018-03-06 17:33   ` J Freyensee

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=98b2fecf-c1b3-aa5e-ba70-2770940bb965@gmail.com \
    --to=why2jjj.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).