[RFC PATCH v4] ARM: uprobes xol write directly to userspace

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 05:21:53PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> Weird, if we store to the kernel side it should be just a matter of
> clearing the I-cache out.  There should be no D-cache aliasing
> whatsoever.  Maybe you could print out area->vaddr and
> page_to_virt(area->page) so we can see if area->vaddr is choosen
> correctly?
> 
> Although I notice that flush_cache_user_range() on ARM flushes both D
> and I caches.  And I think that's what userspace ends up triggering
> when it uses the system call that exists to support self-modifying and
> JIT code generators.
> 
> An ARM expert will have to chime in...

So, David's patch is against the existing kernel (I checked the blob ID
in the patch.)

It looks like David just replaced flush_dcache_page() with
flush_icache_all() as a hack. So my question is... between
flush_dcache_page() and flush_icache_all(), what was the intermediary
(if any) that was attempted?


Now, I'm going to fill in some details for DaveM.  The type of the I/D
L1 caches found on any particular architecture version of CPU can be:

Arch	D-cache			I-cache
ARMv7	VIPT nonaliasing	VIVT ASID tagged
				PIPT
-------------------------------------------------
ARMv6	VIPT nonalising		VIPT nonaliasing
	VIPT aliasing		VIPT aliasing
-------------------------------------------------
ARMv5	VIVT			VIVT
&older

(For ARMv6, each can be either/or, though practically, there's no point
to I-aliasing and D-nonaliasing since it implies the I-cache is bigger
than the D-cache.)

Our I-caches don't snoop/see the D-cache at all - so writes need to be
pushed out to what we call the "point of unification" where the I and D
streams meet.  For anything we care about, that's normally the L2 cache -
L1 cache is harvard, L2 cache is unified.

Hence, we don't care which D-alias (if any) the data is written, so long
as it's pushed out of the L1 data cache so that it's visible to the L1
instruction cache.

If we're writing via a different mapping to that which is being executed,
I think the safest thing to do is to flush it out of the L1 D-cache at
the address it was written, and then flush any stale line from the L1
I-cache using the user address.  This is quite a unique requirement, and
we don't have anything which covers it.  The closest you could get is
to that using existing calls is:

1. write the new instruction
2. flush_dcache_page()
3. flush_cache_user_range() using the user address

and I think that should be safe on all the above cache types.

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly
improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.