[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwwWHM2BUVKXemPX3RXXn=TiPXu8YnRXVLB9toRwcKU1g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:26:52 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 6/6] x86/entry/pti: don't switch PGD on when
pti_disable is set
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> The other case may be the CLONE_NEW* operations. I *think* they are
> noops as far as PTI settings would be, but I think people should think
> about them.
Oh, and yes, I think the npti flag should also break ptrace(). I do
agree with Andy that it's a "capability", although I do not think it
should actually be implemented as one.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists