[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <65f3412e598c8_13f3a29410@iweiny-mobl.notmuch>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 11:25:50 -0700
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "keescook@...omium.org"
<keescook@...omium.org>
CC: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com"
<kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, "luto@...nel.org" <luto@...nel.org>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org"
<linux-mm@...ck.org>, "rppt@...nel.org" <rppt@...nel.org>, "vbabka@...e.cz"
<vbabka@...e.cz>, "linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>, "shakeelb@...gle.com"
<shakeelb@...gle.com>, "Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Williams, Dan
J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, "ardb@...gle.com" <ardb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] PKS write protected page tables
Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-03-14 at 09:27 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 04:59:08PM -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> > > This is a second RFC for the PKS write protected tables concept.
> > > I'm sharing to
> > > show the progress to interested people. I'd also appreciate any
> > > comments,
> > > especially on the direct map page table protection solution (patch
> > > 17).
> >
> > *thread necromancy*
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Where does this series stand? I don't think it ever got merged?
>
> There are sort of three components to this:
> 1. Basic PKS support. It was dropped after the main use case was
> rejected (pmem stray write protection).
This was the main reason it got dropped.
> 2. Solution for applying direct map permissions efficiently. This
> includes avoiding excessive kernel shootdowns, as well as avoiding
> direct map fragmentation. rppt continued to look at the fragmentation
> part of the problem and ended up arguing that it actually isn't an
> issue [0]. Regardless, the shootdown problem remains for usages like
> PKS tables that allocate so frequently. There is an attempt to address
> both in this series. But given the above, there may be lots of debate
> and opinions.
> 3. The actual protection of the PKS tables (most of this series). It
> got paused when I started to work on CET. In the meantime 1 was
> dropped, and 2 is still open(?). So there is more to work through now,
> then when it was dropped.
>
> If anyone wants to pick it up, it is fine by me. I can help with
> reviews.
I can help with reviews as well,
Ira
>
>
> [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/931406/
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.
