linux-kernel - Re: PTE access rules & abstraction

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 26 Sep 2008 09:02:17 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: PTE access rules & abstraction

On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 15:27 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Yeah, that would work too; that's pretty much how Xen implements it
> anyway.  The main advantage of the start/commit pair is that the
> resulting code was completely unchanged from the old code.  The mprotect
> sequence using ptep_modify_protection would end up reading the pte twice
> before writing it.

Not necessarily .. depends how you factor out the interface to it.

Anyway, not a big deal now. I'll do a patch to fix the hole on powerpc,
and if my brain clicks, over the next few weeks, I'll see if I can come
up with an overall nicer API covering all usages. In many case might
just be a matter of giving a saner name to existing calls and
documenting them properly tho :-)

Cheers,
Ben.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/