[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181031094506.GM744@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 10:45:06 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...il.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...wei.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/17] prmem: documentation
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 02:02:12PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> But I dislike allowing regular writes in the protected region. We
> really only need four write primitives:
>
> 1. Just write one value. Call at any time (except NMI).
>
> 2. Just copy some bytes. Same as (1) but any number of bytes.
Given the !preempt/!IRQ contraints I'd certainly put an upper limit on
the number of bytes there.
> 3,4: Same as 1 and 2 but must be called inside a special rare write
> region. This is purely an optimization.
>
> Actually getting a modifiable pointer should be disallowed for two
> reasons:
>
> 1. Some architectures may want to use a special
> write-different-address-space operation.
You're thinking of s390 ? :-)
> Heck, x86 could, too: make
> the actual offset be a secret and shove the offset into FSBASE or
> similar. Then %fs-prefixed writes would do the rare writes.
> 2. Alternatively, x86 could set the U bit. Then the actual writes
> would use the uaccess helpers, giving extra protection via SMAP.
Cute, and yes, something like that would be nice.
> We don’t really want a situation where an unchecked pointer in the
> rare write region completely defeats the mechanism.
Agreed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
