linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/17] prmem: documentation

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

Date:   Wed, 31 Oct 2018 11:11:24 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...il.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        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 Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 12:15:46AM +0200, Igor Stoppa wrote:
> On 30/10/2018 23:02, 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.
> > 
> > 3,4: Same as 1 and 2 but must be called inside a special rare write
> > region. This is purely an optimization.
> 
> Atomic? RCU?

RCU can be done, that's not really a problem. Atomics otoh are a
problem. Having pointers makes them just work.

Andy; I understand your reason for not wanting them, but I really don't
want to duplicate everything. Is there something we can do with static
analysis to make you more comfortable with the pointer thing?