| Message ID | 20200916073539.3552-1-rppt@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | mm: introduce memfd_secret system call to create "secret" memory areas | expand |
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 10:35:34 +0300 Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote: > This is an implementation of "secret" mappings backed by a file descriptor. > I've dropped the boot time reservation patch for now as it is not strictly > required for the basic usage and can be easily added later either with or > without CMA. It seems early days for this, especially as regards reviewer buyin. But I'll toss it in there to get it some additional testing. A test suite in tools/testging/selftests/ would be helpful, especially for arch maintainers. I assume that user-facing manpage alterations are planned?
On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 at 01:20, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 10:35:34 +0300 Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote: > > > This is an implementation of "secret" mappings backed by a file descriptor. > > I've dropped the boot time reservation patch for now as it is not strictly > > required for the basic usage and can be easily added later either with or > > without CMA. > > It seems early days for this, especially as regards reviewer buyin. > But I'll toss it in there to get it some additional testing. > > A test suite in tools/testging/selftests/ would be helpful, especially > for arch maintainers. > > I assume that user-facing manpage alterations are planned? I was just about to write a mail into this thread when I saw this :-). So far, I don't think I saw a manual page patch. Mike, how about it? Thanks, Michael
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 04:20:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 10:35:34 +0300 Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote: > > > This is an implementation of "secret" mappings backed by a file descriptor. > > I've dropped the boot time reservation patch for now as it is not strictly > > required for the basic usage and can be easily added later either with or > > without CMA. > > It seems early days for this, especially as regards reviewer buyin. > But I'll toss it in there to get it some additional testing. Thanks! > A test suite in tools/testging/selftests/ would be helpful, especially > for arch maintainers. I'll look into it. > I assume that user-facing manpage alterations are planned? Of course.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 07:46:12AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 at 01:20, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 10:35:34 +0300 Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > This is an implementation of "secret" mappings backed by a file descriptor. > > > I've dropped the boot time reservation patch for now as it is not strictly > > > required for the basic usage and can be easily added later either with or > > > without CMA. > > > > It seems early days for this, especially as regards reviewer buyin. > > But I'll toss it in there to get it some additional testing. > > > > A test suite in tools/testging/selftests/ would be helpful, especially > > for arch maintainers. > > > > I assume that user-facing manpage alterations are planned? > I was just about to write a mail into this thread when I saw this :-). > > So far, I don't think I saw a manual page patch. Mike, how about it? It is planned :) I have a draft, but I'm waiting for consensus about the uncached mappings before sending it out.
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 10:35 +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> > > Hi, > > This is an implementation of "secret" mappings backed by a file descriptor. > I've dropped the boot time reservation patch for now as it is not strictly > required for the basic usage and can be easily added later either with or > without CMA. On powerpc: https://gitlab.com/cailca/linux-mm/-/blob/master/powerpc.config There is a compiling warning from the today's linux-next: <stdin>:1532:2: warning: #warning syscall memfd_secret not implemented [-Wcpp]
On Thu, 2020-09-17 at 09:27 -0400, Qian Cai wrote: > On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 10:35 +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> > > > > Hi, > > > > This is an implementation of "secret" mappings backed by a file descriptor. > > I've dropped the boot time reservation patch for now as it is not strictly > > required for the basic usage and can be easily added later either with or > > without CMA. > > On powerpc: https://gitlab.com/cailca/linux-mm/-/blob/master/powerpc.config > > There is a compiling warning from the today's linux-next: > > <stdin>:1532:2: warning: #warning syscall memfd_secret not implemented [-Wcpp] This should silence the warning: diff --git a/scripts/checksyscalls.sh b/scripts/checksyscalls.sh index a18b47695f55..b7609958ee36 100755 --- a/scripts/checksyscalls.sh +++ b/scripts/checksyscalls.sh @@ -40,6 +40,10 @@ cat << EOF #define __IGNORE_setrlimit /* setrlimit */ #endif +#ifndef __ARCH_WANT_MEMFD_SECRET +#define __IGNORE_memfd_secret +#endif + /* Missing flags argument */ #define __IGNORE_renameat /* renameat2 */
Hi all, On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 14:25:15 -0400 Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 2020-09-17 at 09:27 -0400, Qian Cai wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 10:35 +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> > > > > > > This is an implementation of "secret" mappings backed by a file descriptor. > > > I've dropped the boot time reservation patch for now as it is not strictly > > > required for the basic usage and can be easily added later either with or > > > without CMA. > > > > On powerpc: https://gitlab.com/cailca/linux-mm/-/blob/master/powerpc.config > > > > There is a compiling warning from the today's linux-next: > > > > <stdin>:1532:2: warning: #warning syscall memfd_secret not implemented [-Wcpp] > > This should silence the warning: > > diff --git a/scripts/checksyscalls.sh b/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > index a18b47695f55..b7609958ee36 100755 > --- a/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > +++ b/scripts/checksyscalls.sh > @@ -40,6 +40,10 @@ cat << EOF > #define __IGNORE_setrlimit /* setrlimit */ > #endif > > +#ifndef __ARCH_WANT_MEMFD_SECRET > +#define __IGNORE_memfd_secret > +#endif > + > /* Missing flags argument */ > #define __IGNORE_renameat /* renameat2 */ > Added to linux-next today.
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> Hi, This is an implementation of "secret" mappings backed by a file descriptor. I've dropped the boot time reservation patch for now as it is not strictly required for the basic usage and can be easily added later either with or without CMA. v5 changes: * rebase on v5.9-rc5 * drop boot time memory reservation patch v4 changes: * rebase on v5.9-rc1 * Do not redefine PMD_PAGE_ORDER in fs/dax.c, thanks Kirill * Make secret mappings exclusive by default and only require flags to memfd_secret() system call for uncached mappings, thanks again Kirill :) v3 changes: * Squash kernel-parameters.txt update into the commit that added the command line option. * Make uncached mode explicitly selectable by architectures. For now enable it only on x86. v2 changes: * Follow Michael's suggestion and name the new system call 'memfd_secret' * Add kernel-parameters documentation about the boot option * Fix i386-tinyconfig regression reported by the kbuild bot. CONFIG_SECRETMEM now depends on !EMBEDDED to disable it on small systems from one side and still make it available unconditionally on architectures that support SET_DIRECT_MAP. The file descriptor backing secret memory mappings is created using a dedicated memfd_secret system call The desired protection mode for the memory is configured using flags parameter of the system call. The mmap() of the file descriptor created with memfd_secret() will create a "secret" memory mapping. The pages in that mapping will be marked as not present in the direct map and will have desired protection bits set in the user page table. For instance, current implementation allows uncached mappings. Although normally Linux userspace mappings are protected from other users, such secret mappings are useful for environments where a hostile tenant is trying to trick the kernel into giving them access to other tenants mappings. Additionally, the secret mappings may be used as a mean to protect guest memory in a virtual machine host. For demonstration of secret memory usage we've created a userspace library [1] that does two things: the first is act as a preloader for openssl to redirect all the OPENSSL_malloc calls to secret memory meaning any secret keys get automatically protected this way and the other thing it does is expose the API to the user who needs it. We anticipate that a lot of the use cases would be like the openssl one: many toolkits that deal with secret keys already have special handling for the memory to try to give them greater protection, so this would simply be pluggable into the toolkits without any need for user application modification. I've hesitated whether to continue to use new flags to memfd_create() or to add a new system call and I've decided to use a new system call after I've started to look into man pages update. There would have been two completely independent descriptions and I think it would have been very confusing. Hiding secret memory mappings behind an anonymous file allows (ab)use of the page cache for tracking pages allocated for the "secret" mappings as well as using address_space_operations for e.g. page migration callbacks. The anonymous file may be also used implicitly, like hugetlb files, to implement mmap(MAP_SECRET) and use the secret memory areas with "native" mm ABIs in the future. As the fragmentation of the direct map was one of the major concerns raised during the previous postings, I've added an amortizing cache of PMD-size pages to each file descriptor that is used as an allocation pool for the secret memory areas. v4: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200818141554.13945-1-rppt@kernel.org v3: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200804095035.18778-1-rppt@kernel.org v2: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200727162935.31714-1-rppt@kernel.org v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200720092435.17469-1-rppt@kernel.org/ rfc-v2: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200706172051.19465-1-rppt@kernel.org/ rfc-v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200130162340.GA14232@rapoport-lnx/ Mike Rapoport (5): mm: add definition of PMD_PAGE_ORDER mmap: make mlock_future_check() global mm: introduce memfd_secret system call to create "secret" memory areas arch, mm: wire up memfd_secret system call were relevant mm: secretmem: use PMD-size pages to amortize direct map fragmentation arch/Kconfig | 7 + arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h | 2 +- arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd32.h | 2 + arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h | 1 + arch/riscv/include/asm/unistd.h | 1 + arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 + arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl | 1 + arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl | 1 + fs/dax.c | 11 +- include/linux/pgtable.h | 3 + include/linux/syscalls.h | 1 + include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h | 7 +- include/uapi/linux/magic.h | 1 + include/uapi/linux/secretmem.h | 8 + kernel/sys_ni.c | 2 + mm/Kconfig | 4 + mm/Makefile | 1 + mm/internal.h | 3 + mm/mmap.c | 5 +- mm/secretmem.c | 333 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 20 files changed, 383 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) create mode 100644 include/uapi/linux/secretmem.h create mode 100644 mm/secretmem.c