[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110531193602.GA26535@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 21:36:02 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>,
richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/10] x86-64: Add CONFIG_UNSAFE_VSYSCALLS to
feature-removal-schedule
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> [...] solution that filters the caller RIP at the generic syscall
> entry point and checks RCX against the 'expected' SYSCALL
> instruction address, which is the (per task) vdso-address +
> constant-offset.
Note that this solution would allow the vsyscall page to be
'filtered' to the 3 allowed system calls rather efficiently, via a
second level check.
This second check does not affect the fastpath, and it could be put
behind a CONFIG_COMPAT_VSYSCALL deprecation define once glibc does
not put vsyscall references anywhere - but we could even keep it
around forever, as this way it's defanged permanently.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists