Re: [PATCH v7 14/41] x86/mm: Introduce _PAGE_SAVED_DIRTY
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
Date: 2023-03-02 17:02:17
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-doc, linux-mm, lkml
On Thu, 2023-03-02 at 13:48 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 02:29:30PM -0800, Rick Edgecombe wrote:quoted
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.hb/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h index 0646ad00178b..56b374d1bffb 100644--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h@@ -21,7 +21,8 @@ #define _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW2 10 /* " */ #define _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW3 11 /* " */ #define _PAGE_BIT_PAT_LARGE 12 /* On 2MB or 1GB pages */ -#define _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW4 58 /* available for programmer*/ +#define _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW4 57 /* available for programmer */ +#define _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW5 58 /* available for programmer */ #define _PAGE_BIT_PKEY_BIT0 59 /* Protection Keys, bit 1/4 */ #define _PAGE_BIT_PKEY_BIT1 60 /* Protection Keys, bit 2/4 */ #define _PAGE_BIT_PKEY_BIT2 61 /* Protection Keys, bit 3/4 */@@ -34,6 +35,15 @@ #define _PAGE_BIT_SOFT_DIRTY _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW3 /* software dirtytracking */ #define _PAGE_BIT_DEVMAP _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW4 +/* + * Indicates a Saved Dirty bit page. + */ +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_USER_SHADOW_STACK +#define _PAGE_BIT_SAVED_DIRTY _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW5 /* Saved Dirty bit */ +#else +#define _PAGE_BIT_SAVED_DIRTY 0 +#endif + /* If _PAGE_BIT_PRESENT is clear, we use these: */ /* - if the user mapped it with PROT_NONE; pte_present gives true */ #define _PAGE_BIT_PROTNONE _PAGE_BIT_GLOBAL@@ -117,6 +127,25 @@ #define _PAGE_SOFTW4 (_AT(pteval_t, 0)) #endif +/* + * The hardware requires shadow stack to be Write=0,Dirty=1.However, + * there are valid cases where the kernel might create read-only PTEs that + * are dirty (e.g., fork(), mprotect(), uffd-wp(), soft-dirty tracking). In + * this case, the _PAGE_SAVED_DIRTY bit is used instead of the HW- dirty bit, + * to avoid creating a wrong "shadow stack" PTEs. Such PTEs have + * (Write=0,SavedDirty=1,Dirty=0) set. + * + * Note that on processors without shadow stack support, the.git/rebase-apply/patch:154: trailing whitespace. * Note that on processors without shadow stack support, the warning: 1 line adds whitespace errors. Hm, apparently git checks for that too - not only trailing empty lines.
Weird. And oops on the space. Just wondering how checkpatch missed this. It didn't, just was in a pile of false positives on that patch and I didn't notice it in there.