[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181018212421.ndjtawc34cqdycyy@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 23:24:21 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] x86/fpu: set PKRU state for kernel threads
On 2018-10-18 13:56:24 [-0700], Dave Hansen wrote:
> > But this is not the only loophole: There is ptrace interface which is
> > used by gdb (just checked) and also bypasses PKRU. So…
>
> Bypassing protection keys is not a big deal IMNHO. In places where a
> sane one is not readily available, I'm totally fine with just
> effectively disabling it (PKRU=0) for the length of time it isn't available.
Okay, this makes things easier. Let document that for kernel threads we
use PKRU=0. This should be happening in my try right now. I double check
tomorrow just in case…
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists