[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu_b6eCy4BbM0xFBgL2EzW+eP5rH+wTOgNCO=ai-vb-WWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 07:54:07 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/18] arm64: efi: restore x18 if it was corrupted
On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 at 00:40, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 11:20 PM Ard Biesheuvel
> <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
> > You'll have to elaborate a bit here and explain that this is
> > sufficient, given that we run EFI runtime services with interrupts
> > enabled.
>
> I can add a note about this in v2. This is called with preemption
> disabled and we have a separate interrupt shadow stack, so as far as I
> can tell, this should be sufficient. Did you have concerns about this?
>
No concerns, but we should put the above clarification in the commit log.
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.
