On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:02:13AM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 13:57:39 -0700
> Ram Pai <linux...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 03:15:22PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > > On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 15:44:59 -0700
> > > Ram Pai <linux...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > This patch provides the implementation of execute-only pkey.
> > > > The architecture-independent layer expects the arch-dependent
> > > > layer, to support the ability to create and enable a special
> > > > key which has execute-only permission.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linux...@us.ibm.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/mmu.h | 1 +
> > > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/pkeys.h | 9 ++++-
> > > > arch/powerpc/mm/pkeys.c | 57
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > 3 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/mmu.h
> > > > b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/mmu.h
> > > > index 55950f4..ee18ba0 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/mmu.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/mmu.h
> > > > @@ -115,6 +115,7 @@ struct patb_entry {
> > > > * bit unset -> key available for allocation
> > > > */
> > > > u32 pkey_allocation_map;
> > > > + s16 execute_only_pkey; /* key holding execute-only protection */
> > > > #endif
> > > > } mm_context_t;
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pkeys.h
> > > > b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pkeys.h
> > > > index 78c5362..0cf115f 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pkeys.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pkeys.h
> > > > @@ -115,11 +115,16 @@ static inline int mm_pkey_free(struct mm_struct
> > > > *mm, int pkey)
> > > > * Try to dedicate one of the protection keys to be used as an
> > > > * execute-only protection key.
> > > > */
> > > > +extern int __execute_only_pkey(struct mm_struct *mm);
> > > > static inline int execute_only_pkey(struct mm_struct *mm)
> > > > {
> > > > - return 0;
> > > > + if (!pkey_inited || !pkey_execute_disable_support)
> > > > + return -1;
> > > > +
> > > > + return __execute_only_pkey(mm);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +
> > > > static inline int arch_override_mprotect_pkey(struct vm_area_struct
> > > > *vma,
> > > > int prot, int pkey)
> > > > {
> > > > @@ -141,6 +146,8 @@ static inline void pkey_mm_init(struct mm_struct
> > > > *mm)
> > > > if (!pkey_inited)
> > > > return;
> > > > mm_pkey_allocation_map(mm) = initial_allocation_mask;
> > > > + /* -1 means unallocated or invalid */
> > > > + mm->context.execute_only_pkey = -1;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > extern void thread_pkey_regs_save(struct thread_struct *thread);
> > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/pkeys.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/pkeys.c
> > > > index 7cd1be4..8a24983 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/pkeys.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/pkeys.c
> > > > @@ -188,3 +188,60 @@ void thread_pkey_regs_init(struct thread_struct
> > > > *thread)
> > > > write_iamr(0x0ul);
> > > > write_uamor(0x0ul);
> > > > }
> > > > +
> > > > +static inline bool pkey_allows_readwrite(int pkey)
> > > > +{
> > > > + int pkey_shift = pkeyshift(pkey);
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!(read_uamor() & (0x3UL << pkey_shift)))
> > > > + return true;
> > >
> > > If uamor for key 0 is 0x10 for example or 0x01 it's a bug.
> > > The above check might miss it.
> >
> >
> > The specs says both the bits corresponding to a key are set or
> > reset, cannot be anything else.
> >
>
> I agree, thats why I said it's a bug if the values are such.
> Do we care to validate that both bits are the same?
I will put in a assert. Will that work?
RP
>
> Balbir Singh.
--
Ram Pai
