[PATCH v8 5/5] arm64: kprobes: call set_memory_rox() for kprobe page

[Catalin Marinas]

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 08:05:55AM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> On 9/18/25 5:48 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 12:02:11PM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > +	page = execmem_alloc(EXECMEM_KPROBES, PAGE_SIZE);
> > > +	if (!page)
> > > +		return NULL;
> > > +	set_memory_rox((unsigned long)page, 1);
> > It's unfortunate that we change the attributes of the ROX vmap first to
> > RO, then to back to ROX so that we get the linear map changed. Maybe
> > factor out some of the code in change_memory_common() to only change the
> > linear map.
> 
> I want to make sure I understand you correctly, you meant set_memory_rox()
> should do:
> 
> change linear map to RO (call a new helper, for example,
> set_direct_map_ro())
> change vmap to ROX (call change_memory_common())

set_memory_rox() is correct. What I meant is that in alloc_insn_page(),
execmem_alloc() already returns RX memory. Calling set_memory_rox() does
indeed change the linear map to RO but it also changes the vmap memory
to RO and then to RX. There's no need for the alloc_insn_page() to do
this but we shouldn't change set_memory_rox() for this, the latter is
correct. I was thinking of alloc_insn_page() calling a new function that
only changes the linear map.

> And I think we should have the cleanup patch separate from this bug fix
> patch because the bug fix patch should be applied to -stable release too.
> Keeping it simpler makes the backport easier.

Yes, for now you can leave it as is, that's not a critical path.

> Shall I squash the cleanup patch into patch #1?

No, I'd leave it as a separate fix, especially if we want to backport
it.

Anyway, for now, with the nitpick on the address variable name:

Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>