Message ID | 20240515024445.236364-4-bgray@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show
Return-Path: <linuxppc-dev-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org> X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@legolas.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: legolas.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=Ixrl5ttU; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: legolas.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=lists.ozlabs.org (client-ip=2404:9400:2:0:216:3eff:fee1:b9f1; helo=lists.ozlabs.org; envelope-from=linuxppc-dev-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org; receiver=patchwork.ozlabs.org) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2404:9400:2:0:216:3eff:fee1:b9f1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) server-digest SHA384) (No client certificate requested) by legolas.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VfHf33M6Tz20KD for <incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 15 May 2024 12:45:46 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=Ixrl5ttU; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4VfHf11PB8z3cF1 for <incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 15 May 2024 12:45:45 +1000 (AEST) X-Original-To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=Ixrl5ttU; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=bgray@linux.ibm.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VfHdg0bmtz2ygZ for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 15 May 2024 12:45:26 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0356517.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 44F2V09R030481; Wed, 15 May 2024 02:45:16 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=kiyYcCbnaRvjsRevX0eMvjXRqsIOctBeDU7l+t5f848=; b=Ixrl5ttUCN+0JbLD7o/BTtTO/FF5nXBBl5rjwX+ptbvpjNbJ5k1LxgS5M5roZ3ynGOKJ gNAYkb5e1Zo6GIZLBVc/2wDSWr/oG7bAPotJuCfrYInWzcBuO+atMoZra8UV+OnJfG9i 4gV0IXETynotPwd4swaBf2332pCdiI01SirJCljrwoIr/6ChSahAibil0rLpMalv+P4G LUYlppv9Dg6CS7bebvxWcwJ6c3BwZCwL1rWlPbxbtgGUOvL9zfXJygTYgZu+dEL+BFru e0ygiLQKS5zInSXSk4+vGrpfkELFLn/+3Wv5hHzQNnIeTkhWBEP2sqoQzWc1zUEA+VAp 2A== Received: from ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dc.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.220]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3y4kaw84cc-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 15 May 2024 02:45:16 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 44F0hW2m018844; Wed, 15 May 2024 02:45:15 GMT Received: from smtprelay04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.228]) by ppma12.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3y2k0th8p8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 15 May 2024 02:45:15 +0000 Received: from smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.106]) by smtprelay04.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 44F2jB0d32834234 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 May 2024 02:45:13 GMT Received: from smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B92692004F; Wed, 15 May 2024 02:45:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50BEC20043; Wed, 15 May 2024 02:45:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ozlabs.au.ibm.com (unknown [9.192.253.14]) by smtpav07.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 May 2024 02:45:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from bgray-lenovo-p15.ozlabs.ibm.com (haven.au.ibm.com [9.192.254.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2CB84610AD; Wed, 15 May 2024 12:45:08 +1000 (AEST) From: Benjamin Gray <bgray@linux.ibm.com> To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: [PATCH v4 3/5] powerpc/64: Convert patch_instruction() to patch_u32() Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 12:44:43 +1000 Message-ID: <20240515024445.236364-4-bgray@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.45.0 In-Reply-To: <20240515024445.236364-1-bgray@linux.ibm.com> References: <20240515024445.236364-1-bgray@linux.ibm.com> X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: 3wQgvErNzpJ8kONxIIur_nz5vOWw6OtR X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 3wQgvErNzpJ8kONxIIur_nz5vOWw6OtR Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.650,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-05-14_16,2024-05-14_01,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1011 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=796 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2405010000 definitions=main-2405150017 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>, <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/> List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org> List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>, <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe> Cc: Naveen N Rao <naveen@kernel.org>, Benjamin Gray <bgray@linux.ibm.com> Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" <linuxppc-dev-bounces+incoming=patchwork.ozlabs.org@lists.ozlabs.org> |
Series |
Add generic data patching functions
|
expand
|
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/module_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/module_64.c index 7112adc597a8..e9bab599d0c2 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/module_64.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/module_64.c @@ -651,12 +651,11 @@ static inline int create_stub(const Elf64_Shdr *sechdrs, // func_desc_t is 8 bytes if ABIv2, else 16 bytes desc = func_desc(addr); for (i = 0; i < sizeof(func_desc_t) / sizeof(u32); i++) { - if (patch_instruction(((u32 *)&entry->funcdata) + i, - ppc_inst(((u32 *)(&desc))[i]))) + if (patch_u32(((u32 *)&entry->funcdata) + i, ((u32 *)&desc)[i])) return 0; } - if (patch_instruction(&entry->magic, ppc_inst(STUB_MAGIC))) + if (patch_u32(&entry->magic, STUB_MAGIC)) return 0; return 1;
This use of patch_instruction() is working on 32 bit data, and can fail if the data looks like a prefixed instruction and the extra write crosses a page boundary. Use patch_u32() to fix the write size. Fixes: 8734b41b3efe ("powerpc/module_64: Fix livepatching for RO modules") Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230203004649.1f59dbd4@yea/ Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gray <bgray@linux.ibm.com> --- v2: * Added the fixes tag, it seems appropriate even if the subject does mention a more robust solution being required. patch_u64() should be more efficient, but judging from the bug report it doesn't seem like the data is doubleword aligned. --- arch/powerpc/kernel/module_64.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)