[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <CC7B46F7-7A6E-4CAF-A1EB-91271CC7B092@amacapital.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 09:48:24 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
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 Oct 18, 2018, at 9:26 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-10-12 11:02:18 [-0700], Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:54 AM Dave Hansen
>> <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/04/2018 07:05 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>>> The PKRU value is not set for kernel threads because they do not have
>>>> the ->initialized value set. As a result the kernel thread has a random
>>>> PKRU value set which it inherits from the previous task.
>>>> It has been suggested by Paolo Bonzini to set it for kernel threads, too
>>>> because it might be a fix.
>>>> I *think* this is not required because the kernel threads don't copy
>>>> data to/from userland and don't have access to any userspace mm in
>>>> general.
>>>> However there is this use_mm(). If we gain a mm by use_mm() we don't
>>>> have a matching PKRU value because those are per thread. It has been
>>>> suggested to use 0 as the PKRU value but this would bypass PKRU.
>>>>
>>>> Set the initial (default) PKRU value for kernel threads.
>>>
>>> We might want to do this for cleanliness reasons... Maybe.
>>>
>>> But this *should* have no practical effects. Kernel threads have no
>>> real 'mm' and no user pages. They should not have do access to user
>>> mappings. Protection keys *only* apply to user mappings. Thus,
>>> logically, they should never be affected by PKRU values.
>>>
>>> So I'm kinda missing the point of the patch.
>>
>> use_mm().
>
> So. I would drop that patch from queue. Anyone feels different about it?
>
I think we *do* want the patch. It’s a bugfix for use_mm users, right?
> Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists