LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, linuxram@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, dave.hansen@intel.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, mingo@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, shuah@kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 9/9] x86, pkeys, selftests: add PROT_EXEC test Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:27:35 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180326172735.EFE9EF33@viggo.jf.intel.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20180326172721.D5B2CBB4@viggo.jf.intel.com> From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Under the covers, implement executable-only memory with protection keys when userspace calls mprotect(PROT_EXEC). But, we did not have a selftest for that. Now we do. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> Cc: Michael Ellermen <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> --- b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff -puN tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c~pkeys-selftests-prot_exec tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c~pkeys-selftests-prot_exec 2018-03-26 10:22:38.087170186 -0700 +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c 2018-03-26 10:22:38.091170186 -0700 @@ -930,10 +930,10 @@ void expected_pk_fault(int pkey) dprintf2("%s(%d): last_si_pkey: %d\n", __func__, pkey, last_si_pkey); pkey_assert(last_pkru_faults + 1 == pkru_faults); - /* - * For exec-only memory, we do not know the pkey in - * advance, so skip this check. - */ + /* + * For exec-only memory, we do not know the pkey in + * advance, so skip this check. + */ if (pkey != UNKNOWN_PKEY) pkey_assert(last_si_pkey == pkey); @@ -1335,6 +1335,49 @@ void test_executing_on_unreadable_memory expected_pk_fault(pkey); } +void test_implicit_mprotect_exec_only_memory(int *ptr, u16 pkey) +{ + void *p1; + int scratch; + int ptr_contents; + int ret; + + dprintf1("%s() start\n", __func__); + + p1 = get_pointer_to_instructions(); + lots_o_noops_around_write(&scratch); + ptr_contents = read_ptr(p1); + dprintf2("ptr (%p) contents@%d: %x\n", p1, __LINE__, ptr_contents); + + /* Use a *normal* mprotect(), not mprotect_pkey(): */ + ret = mprotect(p1, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_EXEC); + pkey_assert(!ret); + + dprintf2("pkru: %x\n", rdpkru()); + + /* Make sure this is an *instruction* fault */ + madvise(p1, PAGE_SIZE, MADV_DONTNEED); + lots_o_noops_around_write(&scratch); + do_not_expect_pk_fault(); + ptr_contents = read_ptr(p1); + dprintf2("ptr (%p) contents@%d: %x\n", p1, __LINE__, ptr_contents); + expected_pk_fault(UNKNOWN_PKEY); + + /* + * Put the memory back to non-PROT_EXEC. Should clear the + * exec-only pkey off the VMA and allow it to be readable + * again. Go to PROT_NONE first to check for a kernel bug + * that did not clear the pkey when doing PROT_NONE. + */ + ret = mprotect(p1, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_NONE); + pkey_assert(!ret); + + ret = mprotect(p1, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_READ|PROT_EXEC); + pkey_assert(!ret); + ptr_contents = read_ptr(p1); + do_not_expect_pk_fault(); +} + void test_mprotect_pkey_on_unsupported_cpu(int *ptr, u16 pkey) { int size = PAGE_SIZE; _
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-26 17:29 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-03-26 17:27 [PATCH 0/9] [v2] x86, pkeys: two protection keys bug fixes Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:27 ` [PATCH 1/9] x86, pkeys: do not special case protection key 0 Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:47 ` Shuah Khan 2018-03-26 17:53 ` Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:58 ` Shuah Khan 2018-03-26 17:27 ` [PATCH 2/9] x86, pkeys, selftests: save off 'prot' for allocations Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:27 ` [PATCH 3/9] x86, pkeys, selftests: add a test for pkey 0 Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:27 ` [PATCH 4/9] x86, pkeys: override pkey when moving away from PROT_EXEC Dave Hansen 2018-04-07 0:09 ` Ram Pai 2018-04-07 0:47 ` Dave Hansen 2018-04-07 1:09 ` Ram Pai 2018-04-26 17:57 ` Dave Hansen 2018-04-30 7:51 ` Ram Pai 2018-04-30 16:36 ` Dave Hansen 2018-04-25 22:10 ` Shakeel Butt 2018-04-26 8:55 ` Thomas Gleixner 2018-04-26 18:17 ` Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:27 ` [PATCH 5/9] x86, pkeys, selftests: fix pointer math Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:27 ` [PATCH 6/9] x86, pkeys, selftests: fix pkey exhaustion test off-by-one Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:27 ` [PATCH 7/9] x86, pkeys, selftests: factor out "instruction page" Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:27 ` [PATCH 8/9] x86, pkeys, selftests: add allow faults on unknown keys Dave Hansen 2018-03-26 17:27 ` Dave Hansen [this message] -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2018-04-27 17:45 [PATCH 0/9] [v3] x86, pkeys: two protection keys bug fixes Dave Hansen 2018-04-27 17:45 ` [PATCH 9/9] x86, pkeys, selftests: add PROT_EXEC test Dave Hansen 2018-03-23 18:09 [PATCH 0/9] x86, pkeys: two protection keys bug fixes Dave Hansen 2018-03-23 18:09 ` [PATCH 9/9] x86, pkeys, selftests: add PROT_EXEC test Dave Hansen
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=20180326172735.EFE9EF33@viggo.jf.intel.com \ --to=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \ --cc=mingo@kernel.org \ --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \ --cc=shuah@kernel.org \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ /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: linkBe 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).