linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] sparc64: Add support for Application Data Integrity (ADI)

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]

Message-Id: <20160308.152746.1746115669072714849.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 08 Mar 2016 15:27:46 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	khalid.aziz@...cle.com
Cc:	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, luto@...capital.net,
	rob.gardner@...cle.com, corbet@....net, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	dingel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, bob.picco@...cle.com,
	kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	aarcange@...hat.com, arnd@...db.de, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
	mhocko@...e.cz, chris.hyser@...cle.com, richard@....at,
	vbabka@...e.cz, koct9i@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com,
	gthelen@...gle.com, jack@...e.cz, xiexiuqi@...wei.com,
	Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com, luto@...nel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	bsegall@...gle.com, geert@...ux-m68k.org, dave@...olabs.net,
	adobriyan@...il.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sparc64: Add support for Application Data Integrity
 (ADI)

From: Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 13:16:11 -0700

> On 03/08/2016 12:57 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>
>> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 14:06:43 -0700
>>
>>> Good questions. Isn't set of valid VAs already constrained by VA_BITS
>>> (set to 44 in arch/sparc/include/asm/processor_64.h)? As I see it we
>>> are already not using the top 4 bits. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>
>> Another limiting constraint is the number of address bits coverable by
>> the 4-level page tables we use.  And this is sign extended so we have
>> a top-half and a bottom-half with a "hole" in the center of the VA
>> space.
>>
>> I want some clarification on the top bits during ADI accesses.
>>
>> If ADI is enabled, then the top bits of the virtual address are
>> intepreted as tag bits.  Once "verified" with the ADI settings, what
>> happense to these tag bits?  Are they dropped from the virtual address
>> before being passed down the TLB et al. for translations?
> 
> Bits 63-60 (tag bits) are dropped from the virtual address before
> being passed down the TLB for translation when PSTATE.mcde = 1.

Ok and you said that values 15 and 0 are special.

I'm just wondering if this means you can't really use ADI mappings in
the top half of the 64-bit address space.  If the bits are dropped, they
will be zero, but they need to be all 1's for the top-half of the VA
space since it's sign extended.