[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 23:25:06 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...wei.com>, keescook@...omium.org,
mhocko@...nel.org, jmorris@...ei.org, paul@...l-moore.com,
sds@...ho.nsa.gov, casey@...aufler-ca.com, hch@...radead.org,
labbott@...hat.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Protectable Memory Allocator
On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 01:44:32PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Igor Stoppa wrote:
> > +int pmalloc_protect_pool(struct pmalloc_pool *pool)
> > +{
> > + struct pmalloc_node *node;
> > +
> > + if (!pool)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + mutex_lock(&pool->nodes_list_mutex);
> > + hlist_for_each_entry(node, &pool->nodes_list_head, nodes_list) {
> > + unsigned long size, pages;
> > +
> > + size = WORD_SIZE * node->total_words + HEADER_SIZE;
> > + pages = size / PAGE_SIZE;
> > + set_memory_ro((unsigned long)node, pages);
> > + }
> > + pool->protected = true;
> > + mutex_unlock(&pool->nodes_list_mutex);
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> As far as I know, not all CONFIG_MMU=y architectures provide
> set_memory_ro()/set_memory_rw(). You need to provide fallback for
> architectures which do not provide set_memory_ro()/set_memory_rw()
> or kernels built with CONFIG_MMU=n.
I think we'll just need to generalize CONFIG_STRICT_MODULE_RWX and/or
ARCH_HAS_STRICT_MODULE_RWX so there is a symbol to key this off.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
