linux-hardening - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 08/15] mm: Introduce kernel_pgtables_set

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]

Message-ID: <69b78d77-0dbd-4257-8076-260a3c64a81d@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 15:33:24 +0100
From: Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
 Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
 Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...omium.org>, Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@....com>,
 Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
 Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois@....com>,
 Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>, "Mike Rapoport (IBM)"
 <rppt@...nel.org>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 08/15] mm: Introduce kernel_pgtables_set_pkey()

On 06/02/2025 20:01, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> +static int set_page_pkey(void *p, int pkey)
>> +static int set_pkey_pte(pmd_t *pmd, int pkey)
>> +static int set_pkey_pmd(pud_t *pud, int pkey)
>> +static int set_pkey_pud(p4d_t *p4d, int pkey)
>> +static int set_pkey_p4d(pgd_t *pgd, int pkey)
>> +int kernel_pgtables_set_pkey(int pkey)
> Aren't these all discardable after boot, so the whole set should
> be tagged with __init?

Good point, I was thinking of this function as a relatively generic one
but in reality there's probably no use for it after boot. In any case
it's only called from a function marked __init at the moment, so it's
safe to mark all those as __init too.

> Other than that it LGTM.

Thank you for the review!

- Kevin