On Thu Aug 5, 2021 at 4:34 AM CDT, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 13/07/2021 à 07:31, Christopher M. Riedl a écrit : > > Rework code-patching with STRICT_KERNEL_RWX to prepare for the next > > patch which uses a temporary mm for patching under the Book3s64 Radix > > MMU. Make improvements by adding a WARN_ON when the patchsite doesn't > > match after patching and return the error from __patch_instruction() > > properly. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christopher M. Riedl <c...@linux.ibm.com> > > > > --- > > > > v5: * New to series. > > --- > > arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++--------------- > > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c > > b/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c > > index 3122d8e4cc013..9f2eba9b70ee4 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c > > @@ -102,11 +102,12 @@ static inline void unuse_temporary_mm(struct temp_mm > > *temp_mm) > > } > > > > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct vm_struct *, text_poke_area); > > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, cpu_patching_addr); > > > > #if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_LKDTM) > > unsigned long read_cpu_patching_addr(unsigned int cpu) > > { > > - return (unsigned long)(per_cpu(text_poke_area, cpu))->addr; > > + return per_cpu(cpu_patching_addr, cpu); > > } > > #endif > > > > @@ -121,6 +122,7 @@ static int text_area_cpu_up(unsigned int cpu) > > return -1; > > } > > this_cpu_write(text_poke_area, area); > > + this_cpu_write(cpu_patching_addr, (unsigned long)area->addr); > > > > return 0; > > } > > @@ -146,7 +148,7 @@ void __init poking_init(void) > > /* > > * This can be called for kernel text or a module. > > */ > > -static int map_patch_area(void *addr, unsigned long text_poke_addr) > > +static int map_patch_area(void *addr) > > { > > unsigned long pfn; > > int err; > > @@ -156,17 +158,20 @@ static int map_patch_area(void *addr, unsigned long > > text_poke_addr) > > else > > pfn = __pa_symbol(addr) >> PAGE_SHIFT; > > > > - err = map_kernel_page(text_poke_addr, (pfn << PAGE_SHIFT), PAGE_KERNEL); > > + err = map_kernel_page(__this_cpu_read(cpu_patching_addr), > > + (pfn << PAGE_SHIFT), PAGE_KERNEL); > > > > - pr_devel("Mapped addr %lx with pfn %lx:%d\n", text_poke_addr, pfn, err); > > + pr_devel("Mapped addr %lx with pfn %lx:%d\n", > > + __this_cpu_read(cpu_patching_addr), pfn, err); > > if (err) > > return -1; > > > > return 0; > > } > > > > -static inline int unmap_patch_area(unsigned long addr) > > +static inline int unmap_patch_area(void) > > { > > + unsigned long addr = __this_cpu_read(cpu_patching_addr); > > pte_t *ptep; > > pmd_t *pmdp; > > pud_t *pudp; > > @@ -175,23 +180,23 @@ static inline int unmap_patch_area(unsigned long addr) > > > > pgdp = pgd_offset_k(addr); > > if (unlikely(!pgdp)) > > - return -EINVAL; > > + goto out_err; > > > > p4dp = p4d_offset(pgdp, addr); > > if (unlikely(!p4dp)) > > - return -EINVAL; > > + goto out_err; > > > > pudp = pud_offset(p4dp, addr); > > if (unlikely(!pudp)) > > - return -EINVAL; > > + goto out_err; > > > > pmdp = pmd_offset(pudp, addr); > > if (unlikely(!pmdp)) > > - return -EINVAL; > > + goto out_err; > > > > ptep = pte_offset_kernel(pmdp, addr); > > if (unlikely(!ptep)) > > - return -EINVAL; > > + goto out_err; > > > > pr_devel("clearing mm %p, pte %p, addr %lx\n", &init_mm, ptep, addr); > > > > @@ -202,15 +207,17 @@ static inline int unmap_patch_area(unsigned long addr) > > flush_tlb_kernel_range(addr, addr + PAGE_SIZE); > > > > return 0; > > + > > +out_err: > > + pr_warn("failed to unmap %lx\n", addr); > > + return -EINVAL; > > Can you keep that in the caller of unmap_patch_area() instead of all > those goto stuff ? >
Yeah I think that's fair. I'll do this in the next spin. > > } > > > > static int do_patch_instruction(u32 *addr, struct ppc_inst instr) > > { > > - int err; > > + int err, rc = 0; > > u32 *patch_addr = NULL; > > unsigned long flags; > > - unsigned long text_poke_addr; > > - unsigned long kaddr = (unsigned long)addr; > > > > /* > > * During early early boot patch_instruction is called > > @@ -222,24 +229,20 @@ static int do_patch_instruction(u32 *addr, struct > > ppc_inst instr) > > > > local_irq_save(flags); > > > > - text_poke_addr = (unsigned long)__this_cpu_read(text_poke_area)->addr; > > - if (map_patch_area(addr, text_poke_addr)) { > > - err = -1; > > + err = map_patch_area(addr); > > + if (err) > > goto out; > > - } > > - > > - patch_addr = (u32 *)(text_poke_addr + (kaddr & ~PAGE_MASK)); > > > > - __patch_instruction(addr, instr, patch_addr); > > + patch_addr = (u32 *)(__this_cpu_read(cpu_patching_addr) | > > offset_in_page(addr)); > > + rc = __patch_instruction(addr, instr, patch_addr); > > > > - err = unmap_patch_area(text_poke_addr); > > - if (err) > > - pr_warn("failed to unmap %lx\n", text_poke_addr); > > + err = unmap_patch_area(); > > > > out: > > local_irq_restore(flags); > > + WARN_ON(!ppc_inst_equal(ppc_inst_read(addr), instr)); > > Why adding that WARN_ON(), what could make that happen that is worth a > WARN_ON() ? Failing to patch something could cause very strange issues later, so explicitly calling out a failure when it happens is warranted IMO. > > Patching is quite a critical fast path, I'm not sure we want to afford > too many checks during > patching, we want it quick at first. Hmm, I'd prefer to measure the impact first - if it's a huge degradation then sure we can drop the WARN_ON()... I'll add some data with the next spin. > > > > > - return err; > > + return rc ? rc : err; > > } > > #else /* !CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX */ > > > >