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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 13:27:49 -0400 From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com> To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Francis Giraldeau <francis.giraldeau@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 10/13] arch/arm: enable task isolation functionality On 11/3/2017 1:23 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 01:04:49PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote: >> From: Francis Giraldeau <francis.giraldeau@...il.com> >> >> This patch is a port of the task isolation functionality to the arm 32-bit >> architecture. The task isolation needs an additional thread flag that >> requires to change the entry assembly code to accept a bitfield larger than >> one byte. The constants _TIF_SYSCALL_WORK and _TIF_WORK_MASK are now >> defined in the literal pool. The rest of the patch is straightforward and >> reflects what is done on other architectures. >> >> To avoid problems with the tst instruction in the v7m build, we renumber >> TIF_SECCOMP to bit 8 and let TIF_TASK_ISOLATION use bit 7. > After a bit of digging (which could've been saved if our patch format > contained information about what kernel version this patch was > generated against) it turns out that this patch will not apply since > commit 73ac5d6a2b6ac ("arm/syscalls: Check address limit on user-mode > return") has been applied, which means the TIF numbers have changed > as well as the assembly code that your patch touches. > > My guess is that this patch was generated from a 4.13 kernel, so > misses the 4.14-rc1 changes. Since we're potentially about to start > the merge window for 4.15 this weekend, the timing of this doesn't > work well either. What patch failure did you see? The patch is based against 4.14-rc4, so while it's a few weeks out of date, it does include the commit you reference. > Once 4.15-rc1 has been published, please rebase against that version > and resend. Sure. I was hoping to eke out a little bit of attention from kernel developers before the merge window actually opens :) -- Chris Metcalf, Mellanox Technologies http://www.mellanox.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists