[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180419093306.rn5bz264nxsn7d7c@node.shutemov.name>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:33:06 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@....com>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Zi Yan <zi.yan@...rutgers.edu>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Evgeniy Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
Lee Smith <Lee.Smith@....com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@....com>,
Jacob Bramley <Jacob.Bramley@....com>,
Ruben Ayrapetyan <Ruben.Ayrapetyan@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 08:53:09PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> arm64 has a feature called Top Byte Ignore, which allows to embed pointer
> tags into the top byte of each pointer. Userspace programs (such as
> HWASan, a memory debugging tool [1]) might use this feature and pass
> tagged user pointers to the kernel through syscalls or other interfaces.
>
> This patch makes a few of the kernel interfaces accept tagged user
> pointers. The kernel is already able to handle user faults with tagged
> pointers and has the untagged_addr macro, which this patchset reuses.
>
> We're not trying to cover all possible ways the kernel accepts user
> pointers in one patchset, so this one should be considered as a start.
How many changes do you anticipate?
This patchset looks small and reasonable, but I see a potential to become a
boilerplate. Would we need to change every driver which implements ioctl()
to strip these bits?
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists