The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mm/pat: fix effective RW computation in lookup_address_in_pgd_attr()
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 11:32:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260717113209.178573db@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260717-verify-rwx-fix-v2-1-fc23141311d6@kernel.org>

On Fri, 17 Jul 2026 12:41:43 +0300
"Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:

> lookup_address_in_pgd_attr() accumulates the effective NX and RW bits of
> the walked page table levels so that verify_rwx() can detect mappings that
> are both writable and executable.
> 
> The RW bits are folded into a bool with
> 
> 	rw &= pXd_flags(*pXd) & _PAGE_RW;
> 
> but _PAGE_RW is 0x2. So consider the accumulation line:
> 
>         rw &= pXd_flags(*pXd) & _PAGE_RW;
> 
> where rw=0x1 and the right side evaluates down to 0x2. It'll end up doing:
> 
>         rw = 0x1 & 0x2
> 
> and rw always ends up 0.
> 
> This way rw becomes false at the first level walked, regardless of the
> actual permissions, and verify_rwx() treats every mapping as non-writable
> and never reports a W^X violation.
> 
> Add double negation to the right side to normalize the _PAGE_RW flag to
> 0 or 1.
> 
> Fixes: ceb647b4b529 ("x86/pat: Introduce lookup_address_in_pgd_attr()")
> Assisted-by: Copilot:claude-opus-4.8
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
> ---
> v2 changes:
> * use a simpler version that uses !! to ensure the comparison result is
>   0 or 1

Isn't this slower (and probably larger) because of the repeated references
to the parameter passed by reference?

	David

> 
> v1: https://patch.msgid.link/20260716-verify-rwx-fix-v1-1-d8a04854df06@kernel.org
> ---
>  arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c b/arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c
> index d023a40a1e03..cd9ecc8e52f9 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c
> @@ -731,7 +731,7 @@ pte_t *lookup_address_in_pgd_attr(pgd_t *pgd, unsigned long address,
>  
>  	*level = PG_LEVEL_512G;
>  	*nx |= pgd_flags(*pgd) & _PAGE_NX;
> -	*rw &= pgd_flags(*pgd) & _PAGE_RW;
> +	*rw &= !!(pgd_flags(*pgd) & _PAGE_RW);
>  
>  	p4d = p4d_offset(pgd, address);
>  	if (p4d_none(*p4d))
> @@ -742,7 +742,7 @@ pte_t *lookup_address_in_pgd_attr(pgd_t *pgd, unsigned long address,
>  
>  	*level = PG_LEVEL_1G;
>  	*nx |= p4d_flags(*p4d) & _PAGE_NX;
> -	*rw &= p4d_flags(*p4d) & _PAGE_RW;
> +	*rw &= !!(p4d_flags(*p4d) & _PAGE_RW);
>  
>  	pud = pud_offset(p4d, address);
>  	if (pud_none(*pud))
> @@ -753,7 +753,7 @@ pte_t *lookup_address_in_pgd_attr(pgd_t *pgd, unsigned long address,
>  
>  	*level = PG_LEVEL_2M;
>  	*nx |= pud_flags(*pud) & _PAGE_NX;
> -	*rw &= pud_flags(*pud) & _PAGE_RW;
> +	*rw &= !!(pud_flags(*pud) & _PAGE_RW);
>  
>  	pmd = pmd_offset(pud, address);
>  	if (pmd_none(*pmd))
> @@ -764,7 +764,7 @@ pte_t *lookup_address_in_pgd_attr(pgd_t *pgd, unsigned long address,
>  
>  	*level = PG_LEVEL_4K;
>  	*nx |= pmd_flags(*pmd) & _PAGE_NX;
> -	*rw &= pmd_flags(*pmd) & _PAGE_RW;
> +	*rw &= !!(pmd_flags(*pmd) & _PAGE_RW);
>  
>  	return pte_offset_kernel(pmd, address);
>  }
> 
> ---
> base-commit: a13c140cc289c0b7b3770bce5b3ad42ab35074aa
> change-id: 20260716-verify-rwx-fix-3b0bd3e51244
> 
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.
> 


      reply	other threads:[~2026-07-17 10:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-17  9:41 [PATCH v2] x86/mm/pat: fix effective RW computation in lookup_address_in_pgd_attr() Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-07-17 10:32 ` David Laight [this message]

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=20260717113209.178573db@pumpkin \
    --to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@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