From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81DAC433B4 for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 16:15:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1A1E61059 for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 16:15:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235861AbhEFQQd (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2021 12:16:33 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:37330 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235246AbhEFQQc (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2021 12:16:32 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3582331B; Thu, 6 May 2021 09:15:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.179] (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 292B43F718; Thu, 6 May 2021 09:15:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/6] arm64: kvm: Introduce MTE VM feature To: Catalin Marinas Cc: Marc Zyngier , Will Deacon , James Morse , Julien Thierry , Suzuki K Poulose , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin , Mark Rutland , Thomas Gleixner , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Richard Henderson , Peter Maydell , Haibo Xu , Andrew Jones References: <20210416154309.22129-1-steven.price@arm.com> <20210416154309.22129-3-steven.price@arm.com> <20210428170705.GB4022@arm.com> From: Steven Price Message-ID: <329286e8-a8f3-ea1a-1802-58813255a4a5@arm.com> Date: Thu, 6 May 2021 17:15:25 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/05/2021 18:40, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 05:06:41PM +0100, Steven Price wrote: >> On 28/04/2021 18:07, Catalin Marinas wrote: >>> I probably asked already but is the only way to map a standard RAM page >>> (not device) in stage 2 via the fault handler? One case I had in mind >>> was something like get_user_pages() but it looks like that one doesn't >>> call set_pte_at_notify(). There are a few other places where >>> set_pte_at_notify() is called and these may happen before we got a >>> chance to fault on stage 2, effectively populating the entry (IIUC). If >>> that's an issue, we could move the above loop and check closer to the >>> actual pte setting like kvm_pgtable_stage2_map(). >> >> The only call sites of kvm_pgtable_stage2_map() are in mmu.c: >> >> * kvm_phys_addr_ioremap() - maps as device in stage 2 >> >> * user_mem_abort() - handled above >> >> * kvm_set_spte_handler() - ultimately called from the .change_pte() >> callback of the MMU notifier >> >> So the last one is potentially a problem. It's called via the MMU notifiers >> in the case of set_pte_at_notify(). The users of that are: >> >> * uprobe_write_opcode(): Allocates a new page and performs a >> copy_highpage() to copy the data to the new page (which with MTE includes >> the tags and will copy across the PG_mte_tagged flag). >> >> * write_protect_page() (KSM): Changes the permissions on the PTE but it's >> still the same page, so nothing to do regarding MTE. > > My concern here is that the VMM had a stage 1 pte but we haven't yet > faulted in at stage 2 via user_mem_abort(), so we don't have any stage 2 > pte set. write_protect_page() comes in and sets the new stage 2 pte via > the callback. I couldn't find any check in kvm_pgtable_stage2_map() for > the old pte, so it will set the new stage 2 pte regardless. A subsequent > guest read would no longer fault at stage 2. > >> * replace_page() (KSM): If the page has MTE tags then the MTE version of >> memcmp_pages() will return false, so the only caller >> (try_to_merge_one_page()) will never call this on a page with tags. >> >> * wp_page_copy(): This one is more interesting - if we go down the >> cow_user_page() path with an old page then everything is safe (tags are >> copied over). The is_zero_pfn() case worries me a bit - a new page is >> allocated, but I can't instantly see anything to zero out the tags (and set >> PG_mte_tagged). > > True, I think tag zeroing happens only if we map it as PROT_MTE in the > VMM. > >> * migrate_vma_insert_page(): I think migration should be safe as the tags >> should be copied. >> >> So wp_page_copy() looks suspicious. >> >> kvm_pgtable_stage2_map() looks like it could be a good place for the checks, >> it looks like it should work and is probably a more obvious place for the >> checks. > > That would be my preference. It also matches the stage 1 set_pte_at(). > >>> While the set_pte_at() race on the page flags is somewhat clearer, we >>> may still have a race here with the VMM's set_pte_at() if the page is >>> mapped as tagged. KVM has its own mmu_lock but it wouldn't be held when >>> handling the VMM page tables (well, not always, see below). >>> >>> gfn_to_pfn_prot() ends up calling get_user_pages*(). At least the slow >>> path (hva_to_pfn_slow()) ends up with FOLL_TOUCH in gup and the VMM pte >>> would be set, tags cleared (if PROT_MTE) before the stage 2 pte. I'm not >>> sure whether get_user_page_fast_only() does the same. >>> >>> The race with an mprotect(PROT_MTE) in the VMM is fine I think as the >>> KVM mmu notifier is invoked before set_pte_at() and racing with another >>> user_mem_abort() is serialised by the KVM mmu_lock. The subsequent >>> set_pte_at() would see the PG_mte_tagged set either by the current CPU >>> or by the one it was racing with. >> >> Given the changes to set_pte_at() which means that tags are restored from >> swap even if !PROT_MTE, the only race I can see remaining is the creation of >> new PROT_MTE mappings. As you mention an attempt to change mappings in the >> VMM memory space should involve a mmu notifier call which I think serialises >> this. So the remaining issue is doing this in a separate address space. >> >> So I guess the potential problem is: >> >> * allocate memory MAP_SHARED but !PROT_MTE >> * fork() >> * VM causes a fault in parent address space >> * child does a mprotect(PROT_MTE) >> >> With the last two potentially racing. Sadly I can't see a good way of >> handling that. > > Ah, the mmap lock doesn't help as they are different processes > (mprotect() acquires it as a writer). > > I wonder whether this is racy even in the absence of KVM. If both parent > and child do an mprotect(PROT_MTE), one of them may be reading stale > tags for a brief period. > > Maybe we should revisit whether shared MTE pages are of any use, though > it's an ABI change (not bad if no-one is relying on this). However... Shared MTE pages are certainly hard to use correctly (e.g. see the discussions with the VMM accessing guest memory). But I guess that boat has sailed. > Thinking about this, we have a similar problem with the PG_dcache_clean > and two processes doing mprotect(PROT_EXEC). One of them could see the > flag set and skip the I-cache maintenance while the other executes > stale instructions. change_pte_range() could acquire the page lock if > the page is VM_SHARED (my preferred core mm fix). It doesn't immediately > solve the MTE/KVM case but we could at least take the page lock via > user_mem_abort(). For PG_dcache_clean AFAICS the solution is actually simple: split the test and set parts. i.e..: if (!test_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags)) { sync_icache_aliases(page_address(page), page_size(page)); set_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags); } There isn't a problem with repeating the sync_icache_aliases() call in the case of a race. Or am I missing something? > Or maybe we just document this behaviour as racy both for PROT_EXEC and > PROT_MTE mappings and be done with this. The minor issue with PROT_MTE > is the potential leaking of tags (it's harder to leak information > through the I-cache). > This is the real issue I see - the race in PROT_MTE case is either a data leak (syncing after setting the bit) or data loss (syncing before setting the bit). But without serialising through a spinlock (in mte_sync_tags()) I haven't been able to come up with any way of closing the race. But with the change to set_pte_at() to call mte_sync_tags() even if the PTE isn't PROT_MTE that is likely to seriously hurt performance. Steve