linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 00/51] powerpc, mm: Memory Protection Keys

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: <87efpbm706.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
Date:   Mon, 06 Nov 2017 22:28:41 +0100
From:   Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de>
To:     Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
Cc:     mpe@...erman.id.au, mingo@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        corbet@....net, arnd@...db.de, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        dave.hansen@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        mhocko@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, paulus@...ba.org,
        aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        bauerman@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/51] powerpc, mm: Memory Protection Keys

* Ram Pai:

> Testing:
> -------
> This patch series has passed all the protection key
> tests available in the selftest directory.The
> tests are updated to work on both x86 and powerpc.
> The selftests have passed on x86 and powerpc hardware.

How do you deal with the key reuse problem?  Is it the same as x86-64,
where it's quite easy to accidentally grant existing threads access to
a just-allocated key, either due to key reuse or a changed init_pkru
parameter?

What about siglongjmp from a signal handler?

  <https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22396>

I wonder if it's possible to fix some of these things before the exact
semantics of these interfaces are set in stone.