From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3C24C25B48 for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 08:59:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=r2IeoKsV; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4SGKVD2r0Bz3c5m for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 19:59:16 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=r2IeoKsV; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=2604:1380:40e1:4800::1; helo=sin.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=rppt@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from sin.source.kernel.org (sin.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:40e1:4800::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4SGKTJ1QJCz2xQK for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 19:58:28 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7009FCE3E47; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 08:58:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9B0BC433C7; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 08:58:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1698310701; bh=daj1kZsVxPjd+zO39ZAev3zCXUc1FaedBgbX73nudCk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=r2IeoKsV+mJJpE6z2XsX1iIp24lKjd2VIwT/xdGbzM4QJ1z6/95hZgo8dTrbqyffN 8DV48I6gafiHJ1W+sQ7xkSCEWs1Wh3ihhaTtNnOomkd5rdfUSH/VyEwenBw8FyxoGy dhmaO/Bq2xkkYLIg5jb3D7re45cnRROW7gfrE4czIzlLWldF8At6B9lE0w5M6vGi01 k5USZIeXtTxyoNfpdwZ4lyaGy8S4FOFzwfuRadAU3111ZEEfuMlEZmph7ucAT6ZG1d z6H7920gFiqm1FRnq/jWuFKwHTDrcmSHuk47fqo8k/MnZWV2iXv2IEUOtl8o74ARYW oZPw5JfD44y3w== Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 11:58:00 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/13] mm/execmem, arch: convert remaining overrides of module_alloc to execmem Message-ID: <20231026085800.GK2824@kernel.org> References: <20230918072955.2507221-1-rppt@kernel.org> <20230918072955.2507221-5-rppt@kernel.org> <20231023171420.GA4041@willie-the-truck> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231023171420.GA4041@willie-the-truck> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , x86@kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Song Liu , Luis Chamberlain , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Nadav Amit , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Helge Deller , Huacai Chen , Russell King , "Naveen N. Rao" , linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , Steven Rostedt , loongarch@lists.linux.dev, Thomas Gleixner , bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Thomas Bogendoerfer , linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, Puranjay Mohan , linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Kent Overstreet , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dinh Nguyen , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn_ T=F6pel?= , Palmer Dabbelt , Andrew Morton , Rick Edgecombe , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" , linux-modules@vger.kernel.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Hi Will, On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 06:14:20PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi Mike, > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 10:29:46AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > From: "Mike Rapoport (IBM)" > > > > Extend execmem parameters to accommodate more complex overrides of > > module_alloc() by architectures. > > > > This includes specification of a fallback range required by arm, arm64 > > and powerpc and support for allocation of KASAN shadow required by > > arm64, s390 and x86. > > > > The core implementation of execmem_alloc() takes care of suppressing > > warnings when the initial allocation fails but there is a fallback range > > defined. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (IBM) > > --- > > arch/arm/kernel/module.c | 38 ++++++++++++--------- > > arch/arm64/kernel/module.c | 57 ++++++++++++++------------------ > > arch/powerpc/kernel/module.c | 52 ++++++++++++++--------------- > > arch/s390/kernel/module.c | 52 +++++++++++------------------ > > arch/x86/kernel/module.c | 64 +++++++++++------------------------- > > include/linux/execmem.h | 14 ++++++++ > > mm/execmem.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > 7 files changed, 167 insertions(+), 153 deletions(-) > > [...] > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/module.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/module.c > > index dd851297596e..cd6320de1c54 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/module.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/module.c > > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > > #include > > #include > > #include > > +#include > > > > #include > > #include > > @@ -108,46 +109,38 @@ static int __init module_init_limits(void) > > > > return 0; > > } > > -subsys_initcall(module_init_limits); > > > > -void *module_alloc(unsigned long size) > > +static struct execmem_params execmem_params __ro_after_init = { > > + .ranges = { > > + [EXECMEM_DEFAULT] = { > > + .flags = EXECMEM_KASAN_SHADOW, > > + .alignment = MODULE_ALIGN, > > + }, > > + }, > > +}; > > + > > +struct execmem_params __init *execmem_arch_params(void) > > { > > - void *p = NULL; > > + struct execmem_range *r = &execmem_params.ranges[EXECMEM_DEFAULT]; > > > > - /* > > - * Where possible, prefer to allocate within direct branch range of the > > - * kernel such that no PLTs are necessary. > > - */ > > Why are you removing this comment? I think you could just move it next > to the part where we set a 128MiB range. Oops, my bad. Will add it back. > > - if (module_direct_base) { > > - p = __vmalloc_node_range(size, MODULE_ALIGN, > > - module_direct_base, > > - module_direct_base + SZ_128M, > > - GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN, > > - PAGE_KERNEL, 0, NUMA_NO_NODE, > > - __builtin_return_address(0)); > > - } > > + module_init_limits(); > > Hmm, this used to be run from subsys_initcall(), but now you're running > it _really_ early, before random_init(), so randomization of the module > space is no longer going to be very random if we don't have early entropy > from the firmware or the CPU, which is likely to be the case on most SoCs. Well, it will be as random as KASLR. Won't that be enough? > > diff --git a/mm/execmem.c b/mm/execmem.c > > index f25a5e064886..a8c2f44d0133 100644 > > --- a/mm/execmem.c > > +++ b/mm/execmem.c > > @@ -11,12 +11,46 @@ static void *execmem_alloc(size_t size, struct execmem_range *range) > > { > > unsigned long start = range->start; > > unsigned long end = range->end; > > + unsigned long fallback_start = range->fallback_start; > > + unsigned long fallback_end = range->fallback_end; > > unsigned int align = range->alignment; > > pgprot_t pgprot = range->pgprot; > > + bool kasan = range->flags & EXECMEM_KASAN_SHADOW; > > + unsigned long vm_flags = VM_FLUSH_RESET_PERMS; > > + bool fallback = !!fallback_start; > > + gfp_t gfp_flags = GFP_KERNEL; > > + void *p; > > > > - return __vmalloc_node_range(size, align, start, end, > > - GFP_KERNEL, pgprot, VM_FLUSH_RESET_PERMS, > > - NUMA_NO_NODE, __builtin_return_address(0)); > > + if (PAGE_ALIGN(size) > (end - start)) > > + return NULL; > > + > > + if (kasan) > > + vm_flags |= VM_DEFER_KMEMLEAK; > > Hmm, I don't think we passed this before on arm64, should we have done? It was there on arm64 before commit 8339f7d8e178 ("arm64: module: remove old !KASAN_VMALLOC logic"). There's no need to pass VM_DEFER_KMEMLEAK when KASAN_VMALLOC is enabled and arm64 always selects KASAN_VMALLOC with KASAN. And for the generic case, I should have made the condition to check for KASAN_VMALLOC as well. > Will -- Sincerely yours, Mike.