From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
To: Jordan Niethe <jniethe5@gmail.com>
Cc: ajd@linux.ibm.com, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
cmr@codefail.de, "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 3/9] powerpc: Always define MODULES_{VADDR,END}
Date: Mon, 3 May 2021 07:57:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6fa81d25-4313-5f15-23d9-06b314bb7d02@csgroup.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACzsE9q1QoSMVZD7yoE=3pHaRc-i14X2++ewFbBxSeZn-2u78A@mail.gmail.com>
Le 03/05/2021 à 07:39, Jordan Niethe a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 3:04 PM Christophe Leroy
> <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 29/04/2021 à 05:15, Jordan Niethe a écrit :
>>> If MODULES_{VADDR,END} are not defined set them to VMALLOC_START and
>>> VMALLOC_END respectively. This reduces the need for special cases. For
>>> example, powerpc's module_alloc() was previously predicated on
>>> MODULES_VADDR being defined but now is unconditionally defined.
>>>
>>> This will be useful reducing conditional code in other places that need
>>> to allocate from the module region (i.e., kprobes).
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jordan Niethe <jniethe5@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> v10: New to series
>>> v11: - Consider more places MODULES_VADDR was being used
>>> ---
>>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable.h | 11 +++++++++++
>>> arch/powerpc/kernel/module.c | 5 +----
>>> arch/powerpc/mm/kasan/kasan_init_32.c | 10 +++++-----
>>> arch/powerpc/mm/ptdump/ptdump.c | 4 ++--
>>> 4 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable.h
>>> index c6a676714f04..882fda779648 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable.h
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable.h
>>> @@ -39,6 +39,17 @@ struct mm_struct;
>>> #define __S110 PAGE_SHARED_X
>>> #define __S111 PAGE_SHARED_X
>>>
>>> +#ifndef MODULES_VADDR
>>> +#define MODULES_VADDR VMALLOC_START
>>> +#define MODULES_END VMALLOC_END
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_32) && defined(CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX)
>>
>> No no.
>>
>> TASK_SIZE > MODULES_VADDR is ALWAYS wrong, for any target, in any configuration.
>>
>> Why is it a problem to leave the test as a BUILD_BUG_ON() in module_alloc() ?
> On ppc64s, MODULES_VADDR is __vmalloc_start (a variable) and
> TASK_SIZE depends on current.
> Also for nohash like 44x, MODULES_VADDR is defined based on high_memory.
> If I put it back in module_alloc() and wrap it with #ifdef
> CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_32 will that be fine?
Thinking about it once more, I think the best approach is the one taken by Nick in
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/patch/20210502110050.324953-1-npiggin@gmail.com/
Use MODULES_VADDR/MODULES_END when it exists, use VMALLOC_START/VMALLOC_END otherwise.
I know I suggested to always define MODULES_VADDR, but maybe that's not the best solution at the end.
For kprobes, is there a way to re-use functions from modules.c in alloc_insn_page() ?
Christophe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-03 5:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-29 3:15 [PATCH v11 0/9] powerpc: Further Strict RWX support Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 3:15 ` [PATCH v11 1/9] powerpc/mm: Implement set_memory() routines Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 7:32 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-05-03 5:02 ` Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 3:15 ` [PATCH v11 2/9] powerpc/lib/code-patching: Set up Strict RWX patching earlier Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 4:53 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-05-05 5:22 ` Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 3:15 ` [PATCH v11 3/9] powerpc: Always define MODULES_{VADDR,END} Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 5:04 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-05-03 5:39 ` Jordan Niethe
2021-05-03 5:57 ` Christophe Leroy [this message]
2021-05-03 6:16 ` Jordan Niethe
2021-05-03 6:22 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-05-03 6:26 ` Jordan Niethe
2021-05-03 6:32 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-29 3:15 ` [PATCH v11 4/9] powerpc/kprobes: Mark newly allocated probes as ROX Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 3:15 ` [PATCH v11 5/9] powerpc/bpf: Remove bpf_jit_free() Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 3:15 ` [PATCH v11 6/9] powerpc/bpf: Write protect JIT code Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 3:16 ` [PATCH v11 7/9] powerpc: Set ARCH_HAS_STRICT_MODULE_RWX Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 3:16 ` [PATCH v11 8/9] powerpc/mm: implement set_memory_attr() Jordan Niethe
2021-04-29 3:16 ` [PATCH v11 9/9] powerpc/32: use set_memory_attr() Jordan Niethe
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=6fa81d25-4313-5f15-23d9-06b314bb7d02@csgroup.eu \
--to=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=ajd@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=cmr@codefail.de \
--cc=dja@axtens.net \
--cc=jniethe5@gmail.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
/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).