Re: [v2 PATCH] arm64: kprobes: call set_memory_rox() for kprobe page

[Yang Shi]

On 9/21/25 12:36 AM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 10:33:26AM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> > On 9/18/25 10:26 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 09:23:49AM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > > The kprobe page is allocated by execmem allocator with ROX permission.
> > > > It needs to call set_memory_rox() to set proper permission for the
> > > > direct map too. It was missed.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 10d5e97c1bf8 ("arm64: use PAGE_KERNEL_ROX directly in alloc_insn_page")
> > > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > v2: Separated the patch from BBML2 series since it is an orthogonal bug
> > > >       fix per Ryan.
> > > >       Fixed the variable name nit per Catalin.
> > > >       Collected R-bs from Catalin.
> > > >
> > > >    arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> > > >    1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
> > > > index 0c5d408afd95..8ab6104a4883 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c
> > > > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> > > >    #define pr_fmt(fmt) "kprobes: " fmt
> > > > +#include <linux/execmem.h>
> > > >    #include <linux/extable.h>
> > > >    #include <linux/kasan.h>
> > > >    #include <linux/kernel.h>
> > > > @@ -41,6 +42,17 @@ DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct kprobe_ctlblk, kprobe_ctlblk);
> > > >    static void __kprobes
> > > >    post_kprobe_handler(struct kprobe *, struct kprobe_ctlblk *, struct pt_regs *);
> > > > +void *alloc_insn_page(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	void *addr;
> > > > +
> > > > +	addr = execmem_alloc(EXECMEM_KPROBES, PAGE_SIZE);
> > > > +	if (!addr)
> > > > +		return NULL;
> > > > +	set_memory_rox((unsigned long)addr, 1);
> > > > +	return addr;
> > > > +}
> > > Why isn't execmem taking care of this? It looks to me like the
> > > execmem_cache_alloc() path calls set_memory_rox() but the
> > > execmem_vmalloc() path doesn't?
> execmem_alloc() -> execmem_vmalloc() consolidated __vmalloc_node_range()
> for executable allocations. Those also didn't update the linear map alias.
>
> It could be added to execmem_vmalloc(), but as of now we don't have a way
> for generic code to tell which set_memory method to call based on pgprot,
> so making execmem_vmalloc() to deal with direct map alias is quite
> involved.
>
> It would be easier to just remove the direct map alias. It works on x86 so
> I don't see what can possibly go wrong :)
>   
> > execmem_cache_alloc() is just called if execmem ROX cache is enabled, but it
> > currently just supported by x86. Included Mike to this thread who is the
> > author of execmem ROX cache.
> >
> > > It feels a bit bizarre to me that we have to provide our own wrapper
> > > (which is identical to what s390 does). Also, how does alloc_insn_page()
> > > handle the direct map alias on x86?
> s390 had its version of alloc_insn_page() long before execmem so there I
> just replaced module_alloc() with exemem_alloc().
>
> arm64 version of alloc_insn_page() didn't update the direct map before
> execmem, so I overlooked this issue when I was converting arm64 to execmem.

Thanks, Mike. It is not your fault. The set_memory_rox() was called in 
arm64's alloc_insn_page() before, but it was mistakenly removed by 
commit 10d5e97c1bf8 ("arm64: use PAGE_KERNEL_ROX directly in 
alloc_insn_page") before execmem.

Yang

>   
> > x86 handles it via execmem ROX cache.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yang
> >
> > > Will