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=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 DA669C433DF for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:50:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F4E720656 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:50:33 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7F4E720656 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id EC9368D0011; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 09:50:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E79028D000E; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 09:50:32 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id DB6118D0011; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 09:50:32 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0021.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.21]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C25418D000E for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 09:50:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin25.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B10723E6F for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:50:32 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76942467504.25.door02_570685a26e10 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3389B1804E3E1 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:50:32 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: door02_570685a26e10 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3448 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by imf11.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:50:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 0D7846736F; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 15:50:28 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 15:50:27 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: David Hildenbrand , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , Dexuan Cui , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Jessica Yu , x86@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: use PAGE_KERNEL_ROX directly in alloc_insn_page Message-ID: <20200618135027.GA23534@lst.de> References: <20200618064307.32739-1-hch@lst.de> <20200618064307.32739-3-hch@lst.de> <90234f58-e83a-7f20-62a7-80a4e81cde95@redhat.com> <20200618103506.GH576905@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200618103506.GH576905@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 3389B1804E3E1 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:35:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 10:55:58AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > On 18.06.20 08:43, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Use PAGE_KERNEL_ROX directly instead of allocating RWX and setting the > > > page read-only just after the allocation. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig > > > --- > > > arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c | 12 +++--------- > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c > > > index d1c95dcf1d7833..cbe49cd117cfec 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c > > > @@ -120,15 +120,9 @@ int __kprobes arch_prepare_kprobe(struct kprobe *p) > > > > > > void *alloc_insn_page(void) > > > { > > > - void *page; > > > - > > > - page = vmalloc_exec(PAGE_SIZE); > > > - if (page) { > > > - set_memory_ro((unsigned long)page, 1); > > > - set_vm_flush_reset_perms(page); > > > - } > > > - > > > - return page; > > > + return __vmalloc_node_range(PAGE_SIZE, 1, VMALLOC_START, VMALLOC_END, > > > + GFP_KERNEL, PAGE_KERNEL_ROX, VM_FLUSH_RESET_PERMS, > > > + NUMA_NO_NODE, __func__); > > > > I do wonder if something like vmalloc_prot(size, prot) would make this > > (and the other two users) easier to read. > > > > So instead of ripping out vmalloc_exec(), converting it into > > vmalloc_prot() instead. > > > > Did you consider that? > > For x86 Christoph did module_alloc_prot(), which is in his more > extensive set of patches addressing this. I suspect that would be the > right thing for ARM64 as well. Yes. The somewhat hacky way I added it cause problems for UML, so I instead plan to do a series converting all architectures over to module_alloc_prot, plus lots of other cleanups in the area that I noticed. I don't think vmalloc_prot is a good idea per se, as there only few potential users, and I don't want too many vmalloc APIs.