Re: [RESEND PATCH v4 10/11] powerpc: Protect patching_mm with a lock
From: Christopher M. Riedl <hidden>
Date: 2021-05-07 20:05:30
Also in:
linux-hardening
On Thu May 6, 2021 at 5:51 AM CDT, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 11:34:51PM -0500, Christopher M. Riedl wrote:quoted
Powerpc allows for multiple CPUs to patch concurrently. When patching with STRICT_KERNEL_RWX a single patching_mm is allocated for use by all CPUs for the few times that patching occurs. Use a spinlock to protect the patching_mm from concurrent use. Modify patch_instruction() to acquire the lock, perform the patch op, and then release the lock. Also introduce {lock,unlock}_patching() along with patch_instruction_unlocked() to avoid per-iteration lock overhead when patch_instruction() is called in a loop. A follow-up patch converts some uses of patch_instruction() to use patch_instruction_unlocked() instead.x86 uses text_mutex for all this, why not do the same?
I wasn't entirely sure if there is a problem with potentially going to sleep in some of the places where patch_instruction() is called - the spinlock avoids that (hypothetical) problem. I just tried switching to text_mutex and at least on a P9 machine the series boots w/ the Hash and Radix MMUs (with some lockdep errors). I can rework this in the next version to use text_mutex if I don't find any new problems with more extensive testing. It does mean more changes to use patch_instruction_unlocked() in kprobe/optprobe/ftace in arch/powerpc since iirc those are called with text_mutex already held. Thanks! Chris R.