On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 10:03 AM Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>
> There's one PTI related layout asymmetry I noticed between 4-level and 
> 5-level kernels:
>
>   47-bit:
> > +                                                            |
> > +                                                            | Kernel-space 
> > virtual memory, shared between all processes:
> > +____________________________________________________________|___________________________________________________________
> > +                  |            |                  |         |
> > + ffff800000000000 | -128    TB | ffff87ffffffffff |    8 TB | ... guard 
> > hole, also reserved for hypervisor
> > + ffff880000000000 | -120    TB | ffffc7ffffffffff |   64 TB | direct 
> > mapping of all physical memory (page_offset_base)
> > + ffffc80000000000 |  -56    TB | ffffc8ffffffffff |    1 TB | ... unused 
> > hole
> > + ffffc90000000000 |  -55    TB | ffffe8ffffffffff |   32 TB | 
> > vmalloc/ioremap space (vmalloc_base)
> > + ffffe90000000000 |  -23    TB | ffffe9ffffffffff |    1 TB | ... unused 
> > hole
> > + ffffea0000000000 |  -22    TB | ffffeaffffffffff |    1 TB | virtual 
> > memory map (vmemmap_base)
> > + ffffeb0000000000 |  -21    TB | ffffebffffffffff |    1 TB | ... unused 
> > hole
> > + ffffec0000000000 |  -20    TB | fffffbffffffffff |   16 TB | KASAN shadow 
> > memory
> > + fffffc0000000000 |   -4    TB | fffffdffffffffff |    2 TB | ... unused 
> > hole
> > +                  |            |                  |         | vaddr_end 
> > for KASLR
> > + fffffe0000000000 |   -2    TB | fffffe7fffffffff |  0.5 TB | 
> > cpu_entry_area mapping
> > + fffffe8000000000 |   -1.5  TB | fffffeffffffffff |  0.5 TB | LDT remap 
> > for PTI
> > + ffffff0000000000 |   -1    TB | ffffff7fffffffff |  0.5 TB | %esp fixup 
> > stacks
> > +__________________|____________|__________________|_________|____________________________________________________________
> > +                                                            |
>
>   56-bit:
> > +                                                            |
> > +                                                            | Kernel-space 
> > virtual memory, shared between all processes:
> > +____________________________________________________________|___________________________________________________________
> > +                  |            |                  |         |
> > + ff00000000000000 |  -64    PB | ff0fffffffffffff |    4 PB | ... guard 
> > hole, also reserved for hypervisor
> > + ff10000000000000 |  -60    PB | ff8fffffffffffff |   32 PB | direct 
> > mapping of all physical memory (page_offset_base)
> > + ff90000000000000 |  -28    PB | ff9fffffffffffff |    4 PB | LDT remap 
> > for PTI
> > + ffa0000000000000 |  -24    PB | ffd1ffffffffffff | 12.5 PB | 
> > vmalloc/ioremap space (vmalloc_base)
> > + ffd2000000000000 |  -11.5  PB | ffd3ffffffffffff |  0.5 PB | ... unused 
> > hole
> > + ffd4000000000000 |  -11    PB | ffd5ffffffffffff |  0.5 PB | virtual 
> > memory map (vmemmap_base)
> > + ffd6000000000000 |  -10.5  PB | ffdeffffffffffff | 2.25 PB | ... unused 
> > hole
> > + ffdf000000000000 |   -8.25 PB | fffffdffffffffff |   ~8 PB | KASAN shadow 
> > memory
> > + fffffc0000000000 |   -4    TB | fffffdffffffffff |    2 TB | ... unused 
> > hole
> > +                  |            |                  |         | vaddr_end 
> > for KASLR
> > + fffffe0000000000 |   -2    TB | fffffe7fffffffff |  0.5 TB | 
> > cpu_entry_area mapping
> > + fffffe8000000000 |   -1.5  TB | fffffeffffffffff |  0.5 TB | ... unused 
> > hole
> > + ffffff0000000000 |   -1    TB | ffffff7fffffffff |  0.5 TB | %esp fixup 
> > stacks
>
> The two layouts are very similar beyond the shift in the offset and the 
> region sizes, except
> one big asymmetry: is the placement of the LDT remap for PTI.
>
> Is there any fundamental reason why the LDT area is mapped into a 4 petabyte 
> (!) area on 56-bit
> kernels, instead of being at the -1.5 TB offset like on 47-bit kernels?
>
> The only reason I can see is that this way is that it's currently coded at 
> the PGD level only:
>
> static void map_ldt_struct_to_user(struct mm_struct *mm)
> {
>         pgd_t *pgd = pgd_offset(mm, LDT_BASE_ADDR);
>
>         if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PTI) && !mm->context.ldt)
>                 set_pgd(kernel_to_user_pgdp(pgd), *pgd);
> }
>
> ( BTW., the 4 petabyte size of the area is misleading: a 5-level PGD entry 
> covers 256 TB of
>   virtual memory, i.e 0.25 PB, not 4 PB. So in reality we have a 0.25 PB area 
> there, used up
>   by the LDT mapping in a single PGD entry, plus a 3.75 PB hole after that. )
>
> ... but unless I'm missing something it's not really fundamental for it to be 
> at the PGD level
> - it could be two levels lower as well, and it could move back to the same 
> place where it's on
> the 47-bit kernel.
>

The subtlety is that, if it's lower than the PGD level, there end up
being some tables that are private to each LDT-using mm that map
things other than the LDT.  Those tables cover the same address range
as some corresponding tables in init_mm, and if those tables in
init_mm change after the LDT mapping is set up, the changes won't
propagate.

So it probably could be made to work, but it would take some extra care.

Reply via email to