Thread (154 messages) 154 messages, 12 authors, 2023-03-20
STALE1226d REVIEWED: 14 (12M)
Revisions (8)
  1. v1 [diff vs current]
  2. v3 [diff vs current]
  3. v4 [diff vs current]
  4. v5 [diff vs current]
  5. v6 [diff vs current]
  6. v7 current
  7. v8 [diff vs current]
  8. v9 [diff vs current]

[PATCH v7 27/41] x86/mm: Warn if create Write=0,Dirty=1 with raw prot

From: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
Date: 2023-02-27 22:34:05
Also in: linux-arch, linux-doc, linux-mm, lkml
Subsystem: the rest, x86 architecture (32-bit and 64-bit) · Maintainers: Linus Torvalds, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen

When user shadow stack is use, Write=0,Dirty=1 is treated by the CPU as
shadow stack memory. So for shadow stack memory this bit combination is
valid, but when Dirty=1,Write=1 (conventionally writable) memory is being
write protected, the kernel has been taught to transition the Dirty=1
bit to SavedDirty=1, to avoid inadvertently creating shadow stack
memory. It does this inside pte_wrprotect() because it knows the PTE is
not intended to be a writable shadow stack entry, it is supposed to be
write protected.

However, when a PTE is created by a raw prot using mk_pte(), mk_pte()
can't know whether to adjust Dirty=1 to SavedDirty=1. It can't
distinguish between the caller intending to create a shadow stack PTE or
needing the SavedDirty shift.

The kernel has been updated to not do this, and so Write=0,Dirty=1
memory should only be created by the pte_mkfoo() helpers. Add a warning
to make sure no new mk_pte() start doing this.

Tested-by: Pengfei Xu <redacted>
Tested-by: John Allen <john.allen@amd.com>
Tested-by: Kees Cook <redacted>
Acked-by: Mike Rapoport (IBM) <rppt@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>

---
v6:
 - New patch (Note, this has already been a useful warning, it caught the
   newly added set_memory_rox() doing this)
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h | 10 +++++++++-
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h
index e5b3dce0d9fe..7142f99d3fbb 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h
@@ -1032,7 +1032,15 @@ static inline unsigned long pmd_page_vaddr(pmd_t pmd)
  * (Currently stuck as a macro because of indirect forward reference
  * to linux/mm.h:page_to_nid())
  */
-#define mk_pte(page, pgprot)   pfn_pte(page_to_pfn(page), (pgprot))
+#define mk_pte(page, pgprot)						 \
+({									 \
+	pgprot_t __pgprot = pgprot;					 \
+									 \
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_USER_SHSTK) &&	 \
+		    (pgprot_val(__pgprot) & (_PAGE_DIRTY | _PAGE_RW)) == \
+		    _PAGE_DIRTY);					 \
+	pfn_pte(page_to_pfn(page), __pgprot);				 \
+})
 
 static inline int pmd_bad(pmd_t pmd)
 {
-- 
2.17.1
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help