[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130618100715.GA3539@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:07:15 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: André Hentschel <nerv@...ncrow.de>
Cc: "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jonathan Austin <Jonathan.Austin@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] arm: Preserve the user r/w register TPIDRURW on
context, switch and fork
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:13:48PM +0100, André Hentschel wrote:
> From: André Hentschel <nerv@...ncrow.de>
>
> Since commit 6a1c53124aa1 the user writeable TLS register was zeroed to
> prevent it from being used as a covert channel between two tasks.
>
> There are more and more applications coming to Windows RT,
> Wine could support them, but mostly they expect to have
> the thread environment block (TEB) in TPIDRURW.
>
> This patch preserves that register per thread instead of clearing it.
> Unlike the TPIDRURO, which is already switched, the TPIDRURW
> can be updated from userspace so needs careful treatment in the case that we
> modify TPIDRURW and call fork(). To avoid this we must always read
> TPIDRURW in copy_thread.
>
> Signed-off-by: André Hentschel <nerv@...ncrow.de>
> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Austin <jonathan.austin@....com>
>
> ---
> This patch is against Linux 3.10-rc6 (7d132055814ef17a6c7b69f342244c410a5e000f)
>
> v2: rework and fixup of v1, based on a suggested patch by Will Deacon
> v3: total rework and fixup of v2
> v4: removed condition on assembler instruction,
> adapted my code to kernel-style, both based on comments by Will Deacon
> v5: rebased v4 on 3.10-rc2 and adding this version history
> v6: moved loading the TLS registers to the macros
> (fixing the "LDRD is not supported on all the CPUs we have" problem)
You've changed quite a lot with this version, including the way the macro
parameters are passed. Why not just replace the problematic ldrd with two
ldr instructions and be done with it? I don't think the simple build error
warrants an overhaul of the code we already had.
Cheers,
Will
--
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