Re: [PATCH v13 04/20] mm, arm64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:18PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > This patch allows tagged pointers to be p

Re: [PATCH v13 09/20] net, arm64: untag user pointers in tcp_zerocopy_receive

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:23PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > tcp_zerocopy_receive() uses provided user

Re: [PATCH v13 12/20] uprobes, arm64: untag user pointers in find_active_uprobe

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:26PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > find_active_uprobe() uses user pointers (

Re: [PATCH v13 11/20] tracing, arm64: untag user pointers in seq_print_user_ip

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:25PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > seq_print_user_ip() uses provided user po

Re: [PATCH v13 17/20] media/v4l2-core, arm64: untag user pointers in videobuf_dma_contig_user_get

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:31PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > videobuf_dma_contig_user_get() uses provi

Re: [PATCH v13 15/20] drm/radeon, arm64: untag user pointers in radeon_ttm_tt_pin_userptr

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:29PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > radeon_ttm_tt_pin_userptr() uses provided

Re: [PATCH v13 10/20] kernel, arm64: untag user pointers in prctl_set_mm*

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:24PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > @@ -2120,13 +2135,14 @@ static int prctl_set_mm(int opt, unsigned long addr, > if (opt == PR_SET_MM_AUXV) > return prctl_set_auxv(mm, addr, arg4); > > - if (addr >= TASK_SIZE || addr < mmap_min_addr) > +

Re: [PATCH v13 13/20] bpf, arm64: untag user pointers in stack_map_get_build_id_offset

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:27PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > stack_map_get_build_id_offset() uses prov

Re: [PATCH v13 18/20] tee/optee, arm64: untag user pointers in check_mem_type

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:32PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > check_mem_type() uses provided user point

Re: [PATCH v13 14/20] drm/amdgpu, arm64: untag user pointers in amdgpu_ttm_tt_get_user_pages

2019-03-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:28PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > amdgpu_ttm_tt_get_user_pages() uses provi

Re: [PATCH v13 10/20] kernel, arm64: untag user pointers in prctl_set_mm*

2019-04-26 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 06:44:34PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:41 PM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:24PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > @@ -2120,13 +2135,14 @@ static int prctl_set_mm(int opt, unsi

Re: [PATCH v14 08/17] mm, arm64: untag user pointers in get_vaddr_frames

2019-05-03 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 03:25:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > get_vaddr_frames uses provided user point

Re: [PATCH v14 10/17] fs, arm64: untag user pointers in fs/userfaultfd.c

2019-05-03 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 03:25:06PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > userfaultfd_register() and userfaultfd_un

Re: [PATCH v14 13/17] IB/mlx4, arm64: untag user pointers in mlx4_get_umem_mr

2019-05-03 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 03:25:09PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > mlx4_get_umem_mr() uses provided user poi

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-17 Thread Catalin Marinas
Hi Andrey, On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:46PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > One of the alternative approaches to untagging that was considered is to > completely strip the pointer tag as the pointer enters the kernel with > some kind of a syscall wrapper, but that won't work with the countless

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-21 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 04:53:07PM -0700, Evgenii Stepanov wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 7:49 AM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > IMO (RFC for now), I see two ways forward: > > > > 1. Make this a user space problem and do not allow tagged pointers into > >the sys

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
Hi Kees, Thanks for joining the thread ;). On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 05:04:39PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 07:29:33PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 04:53:07PM -0700, Evgenii Stepanov wrote: > > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 7:49

Re: [PATCH v15 03/17] lib, arm64: untag user pointers in strn*_user

2019-05-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
ly untags the pointers to perform > validity checks, but then uses them as is to perform user memory accesses. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov Just to keep track of where I am with the reviews while the ABI discussion continues: Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas

Re: [PATCH v15 04/17] mm: add ksys_ wrappers to memory syscalls

2019-05-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
ect_pkey -> ksys_mprotect_pkey), mremap, msync, > munlock, munmap, remap_file_pages, shmat, shmdt. > > The next patch in this series will add a custom implementation for these > syscalls that makes them accept tagged pointers on arm64. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > This patch allows tagged pointers to be p

Re: [PATCH v15 06/17] mm: untag user pointers in do_pages_move

2019-05-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
is used in the implementation of the move_pages syscall. > > Untag user pointers in this function. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas

Re: [PATCH v15 07/17] mm, arm64: untag user pointers in mm/gup.c

2019-05-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
r vma lookups. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas

Re: [PATCH v15 09/17] fs, arm64: untag user pointers in copy_mount_options

2019-05-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
ag the address before subtracting. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas

Re: [PATCH v15 17/17] selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel

2019-05-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:31:03PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > This patch adds a simple test, that calls

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-22 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 08:30:21AM -0700, enh wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 3:11 AM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 05:04:39PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > > I just want to make sure I fully understand your concern about this > > > being an A

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-23 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 04:09:31PM -0700, enh wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:03 PM Evgenii Stepanov wrote: > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 1:47 PM Kees Cook wrote: > > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 05:35:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > > I would also expect t

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-23 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 02:16:57PM -0700, Evgenii Stepanov wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:49 AM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-23 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 01:47:36PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 05:35:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > The two hard requirements I have for supporting any new hardware feature > > in Linux are (1) a single kernel image binary continues to run on old >

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-23 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 12:21:27PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > If a process wants to not tag, that's also up to the allocator where > it can decide not to ask the kernel, and just not tag. Nothing breaks in > userspace if a process is NOT tagging and untagged_addr() exists or is > missing. This, I th

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-23 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 09:58:22AM -0700, enh wrote: > i was questioning the argument about the ioctl issues, and saying that > from my perspective, untagging bugs are not really any different than > any other kind of kernel bug. Once this series gets in, they are indeed just kernel bugs. What I w

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-23 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:42:57AM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 09:20:52PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 02:49:28PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: > > > If multiple people will care about this, perhaps we should try to > > > annotate types more explic

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-23 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 08:44:12AM -0700, enh wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 7:45 AM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 01:47:36PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > > For userspace, how would a future binary choose TBI over MTE? If it's > > > a

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-23 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 09:38:19AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 03:44:49PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > There is also the obvious requirement which I didn't mention: new user > > space continues to run on new/subsequent kernel versions. That's

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-23 Thread Catalin Marinas
Hi Khalid, On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:51:40AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: > On 5/21/19 6:04 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > > As an aside: I think Sparc ADI support in Linux actually side-stepped > > this[1] (i.e. chose "solution 1"): "All addresses passed to kernel must > > be non-ADI tagged addresses." (An

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-24 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 03:49:05PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: > On 5/23/19 2:11 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:51:40AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: > >> On 5/21/19 6:04 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > >>> As an aside: I think Sparc ADI support

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-24 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 02:31:16PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 06:43:46PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 09:38:19AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > > What about testing tools that intentionally insert high bits for syscalls > &g

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-25 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > +SYSCALL_DEFINE5(arm64_get_mempolicy, int __user *, policy, > + unsigned long __user *, nmask, unsigned long, maxnode, > + unsigned long, addr, unsigned long, flags) > +{ > + addr = untagged_addr(addr);

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-27 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > +SYSCALL_DEFINE2(arm64_mlock2, unsigned long, start, size_t, len) > +{ > + start = untagged_addr(start); > + return ksys_mlock(start, len, VM_LOCKED); > +} Copy/paste error: sys_mlock2() has 3 arguments and should call ksy

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-27 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to > pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other > than 0x00) as syscall arguments. > > This patch allows tagged pointers to be p

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-28 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > /* > * Wrappers to pass the pt_regs argument. > */ > #define sys_personality sys_arm64_personality > +#define sys_mmap_pgoff sys_arm64_mmap_pgoff > +#define sys_mremap sys_arm64_mremap > +

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-28 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 03:54:11PM +0100, Andrew Murray wrote: > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 03:37:20PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-28 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:56:45PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:40:58PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > [...] > > > My thoughts on allowing tags (quick look): > > > > brk - no > > [...] > > > mlock, mlock2, munlock - y

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-28 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 02:31:16PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > syzkaller already attempts to randomly inject non-canonical and > 0x addresses for user pointers in syscalls in an effort to > find bugs like CVE-2017-5123 where waitid() via unchecked put_user() was > able to write directly t

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-29 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:11:26PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:14:45PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > Thanks for a lot of valuable input! I've read through all the replies > > and got somewhat lost. What are the changes I need to do to this > > series? > > > >

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-29 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 01:42:25PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 05:34:00PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:56:45PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:40:58PM +0100, Cat

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-29 Thread Catalin Marinas
Hi Khalid, On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 05:33:04PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: > On Tue, 2019-05-28 at 16:40 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > I think another aspect is how we define the ABI. Is allowing tags to > > mlock() for example something specific to arm64 or would sparc ADI > &

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-30 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 01:16:37PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: > On 5/29/19 8:20 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 05:33:04PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: > >> Steps 1 and 2 are accomplished by userspace by calling mprotect() with > >> PROT_ADI. Tags a

Re: [PATCH v15 05/17] arms64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-05-30 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:05:55AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote: > On 5/30/19 9:11 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > So if a database program is doing an anonymous mmap(PROT_TBI) of 100GB, > > IIUC for sparc the faulted-in pages will have random colours (on 64-byte > > granu

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-30 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:14:45PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > Thanks for a lot of valuable input! I've read through all the replies > and got somewhat lost. What are the changes I need to do to this > series? > > 1. Should I move untagging for memory syscalls back to the generic > code so ot

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-31 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 04:29:10PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 7:15 PM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:14:45PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > Thanks for a lot of valuable input! I've read through all the repl

Re: [PATCH v15 17/17] selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel

2019-05-31 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 04:21:48PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:16 PM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:31:03PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow

Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-05-31 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 06:24:06PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 6:20 PM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 04:29:10PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 7:15 PM Catalin Marinas > > > wrote: &

Re: [PATCH v16 05/16] arm64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-06-10 Thread Catalin Marinas
not currently accept tagged hint addresses. Architectures may interpret the hint tag as a background colour for the corresponding vma. With this: Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas -- Catalin

Re: [PATCH v16 07/16] mm, arm64: untag user pointers in get_vaddr_frames

2019-06-10 Thread Catalin Marinas
s provided user pointers for vma lookups, which can > only by done with untagged pointers. Instead of locating and changing > all callers of this function, perform untagging in it. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov Acked-by: Catalin Marinas

Re: [PATCH v16 02/16] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and __uaccess_mask_ptr

2019-06-10 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h > b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h > index e5d5f31c6d36..9164ecb5feca 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h > @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ sta

Re: [PATCH v16 02/16] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and __uaccess_mask_ptr

2019-06-10 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 11:07:03AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 06:53:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h > > > b/arch/

Re: [PATCH v16 02/16] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and __uaccess_mask_ptr

2019-06-11 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 06:53:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h > > b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h > > index e5d5f31c6d36..9164ecb5feca 100644 > &g

Re: [PATCH v16 16/16] selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel

2019-06-11 Thread Catalin Marinas
mple test, that calls the uname syscall with a > tagged user pointer as an argument. Without the kernel accepting tagged > user pointers the test fails with EFAULT. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov BTW, you could add Co-developed-by: Catalin Marinas since I wrote the malloc() e

Re: [PATCH v16 02/16] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and __uaccess_mask_ptr

2019-06-11 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 07:09:46PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:57 PM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 06:53:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote

Re: [PATCH v16 05/16] arm64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-06-11 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 05:35:31PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:28 PM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:07PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow

Re: [PATCH v16 16/16] selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel

2019-06-11 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 07:18:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:01 PM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > static void *tag_ptr(void *ptr) > > { > > static int tagged_addr_err = 1; > > unsigned long tag = 0; > >

Re: [PATCH v16 02/16] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and __uaccess_mask_ptr

2019-06-12 Thread Catalin Marinas
Hi Vincenzo, On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 06:09:10PM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > > index 3767fb21a5b8..69d0be1fc708 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ >

Re: [PATCH v16 15/16] vfio/type1, arm64: untag user pointers in vaddr_get_pfn

2019-06-12 Thread Catalin Marinas
s provided user pointers for vma lookups, which can > only by done with untagged pointers. > > Untag user pointers in this function. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas

Re: [PATCH v16 09/16] fs, arm64: untag user pointers in fs/userfaultfd.c

2019-06-12 Thread Catalin Marinas
e provided user pointers for vma lookups, which can > only by done with untagged pointers. > > Untag user pointers in validate_range(). > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas

Re: [PATCH v16 12/16] IB, arm64: untag user pointers in ib_uverbs_(re)reg_mr()

2019-06-12 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 03:09:26PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 3:02 PM Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 02:45:32PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 02:18:19PM +0

Re: [PATCH v16 02/16] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and __uaccess_mask_ptr

2019-06-12 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:03:10PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 7:39 PM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 07:09:46PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > Should I drop access_ok() change from my patch, since yours just reverts

Re: [PATCH v17 03/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI

2019-06-12 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > From: Catalin Marinas > > It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into > the kernel indiscriminately. This patch introduces a prctl() interface > for enabling or disabling the tagged AB

Re: [PATCH v17 15/15] selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel

2019-06-12 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:30:36PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > On 12/06/2019 12:43, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags_lib.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@ > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > + > > +#include > > +#include > > + > > +#define TAG

Re: [PATCH v17 03/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI

2019-06-13 Thread Catalin Marinas
Hi Dave, On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 12:02:35PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > +/* > > + * Global sysctl to disable the tagged user addresses support. This control > > + * only prevents the tagged address ABI enabling via prctl() and

Re: [PATCH v17 03/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI

2019-06-13 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 12:16:59PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > From: Catalin Marinas > > > > It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into > > the kernel indiscriminate

Re: [PATCH v17 03/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI

2019-06-13 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 04:45:54PM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote: > On 13/06/2019 16:35, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 12:16:59PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > >>> + > >

Re: [PATCH v17 03/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI

2019-06-17 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > From: Catalin Marinas > > It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into > the kernel indiscriminately. This patch introduces a prctl() interface > for enabling or disabling the tagged AB

Re: [PATCH v17 03/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI

2019-06-17 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 09:57:36AM -0700, Evgenii Stepanov wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 6:56 AM Catalin Marinas > wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > > From: Catalin Marinas > > > > > > It is not desirabl

Re: [PATCH v19 00/15] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-08-09 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 04:09:04PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 03:33:00PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:12:19 -0700 Kees Cook wrote: > > > > > > The ones that are left are the mm ones: 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. > > > > > > > > Andrew, could you take a look a

Re: [PATCH v19 04/15] mm: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls

2019-08-09 Thread Catalin Marinas
colour for the > corresponding vma. > > Reviewed-by: Khalid Aziz > Reviewed-by: Vincenzo Frascino > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov > --- > mm/madvise.c | 2 ++ > mm/mempolicy.c | 3 +++ > mm/mi

Re: [PATCH v19 02/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI

2019-08-09 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 07:58:39PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > From: Catalin Marinas > > It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into > the kernel indiscriminately. This patch introduces a prctl() interface > for enabling or disabling the tagged AB

Re: [PATCH v17 03/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI

2019-06-19 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 04:45:02PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 1:43 PM Andrey Konovalov > wrote: > > From: Catalin Marinas > > > > It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into > > the kernel indiscriminately.

Re: [PATCH v18 15/15] selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel

2019-06-24 Thread Catalin Marinas
bled = 0; > + struct utsname *ptr, *tagged_ptr; > + int err; > + > + if (prctl(PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL, PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE, 0, 0, 0) == 0) > + tbi_enabled = 1; Nitpick: with the latest prctl() patch, you can skip the last three arguments as they are ignored. Either way: Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas

Re: [PATCH v18 11/15] IB/mlx4: untag user pointers in mlx4_get_umem_mr

2019-06-24 Thread Catalin Marinas
d user pointers for vma lookups, which can > only by done with untagged pointers. > > Untag user pointers in this function. > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov > --- > drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx4/mr.c | 7 --- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) Acke

Re: [PATCH v18 07/15] fs/namespace: untag user pointers in copy_mount_options

2019-06-24 Thread Catalin Marinas
ag the address before subtracting. > > Reviewed-by: Khalid Aziz > Reviewed-by: Vincenzo Frascino > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov > --- > fs/namespace.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(

Re: [PATCH v18 08/15] userfaultfd: untag user pointers

2019-06-24 Thread Catalin Marinas
d user pointers for vma lookups, which can > only by done with untagged pointers. > > Untag user pointers in validate_range(). > > Reviewed-by: Vincenzo Frascino > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov > --- > fs/u

Re: [PATCH v18 00/15] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-06-26 Thread Catalin Marinas
IB/mlx4: untag user pointers in mlx4_get_umem_mr > media/v4l2-core: untag user pointers in videobuf_dma_contig_user_get > tee/shm: untag user pointers in tee_shm_register > vfio/type1: untag user pointers in vaddr_get_pfn > selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers

Re: [PATCH v19 00/15] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

2019-08-02 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 08:36:47AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 8/1/19 5:48 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 2:11 PM Kevin Brodsky wrote: > >> On 31/07/2019 17:50, Dave Hansen wrote: > >>> On 7/23/19 10:58 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > The mmap and mremap (only new_add

Re: [PATCH v19 02/15] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI

2019-08-02 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:45:05AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 8/1/19 5:38 AM, Kevin Brodsky wrote: > > This patch series only changes what is allowed or not at the syscall > > interface. It does not change the address space size. On arm64, TBI (Top > > Byte Ignore) has always been enabled for u