[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d29492e3-b071-7b16-41ec-c499d6802257@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2023 09:16:03 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...omium.org>
Cc: Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...gle.com>,
Stephen Röttger <sroettger@...gle.com>,
luto@...nel.org, jorgelo@...omium.org, keescook@...omium.org,
groeck@...omium.org, jannh@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Memory Mapping (VMA) protection using PKU - set 1
On 5/31/23 18:39, Jeff Xu wrote:
> I think this solution should work.
By "work" I think you mean that if laser-focused on this one use case,
without a full implementation, it looks like it can work.
I'll give you a "maybe" on that.
But that leaves out the bigger picture. How many other things will we
regress doing this? What's the opportunity cost? What other things
will get neglected because we did _this_ one? Are there more users out
there?
Looking at the big picture, I'm not convinced those tradeoffs are good
ones (and you're not going to find anyone that's a bigger fan of pkeys
than me).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists