[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9c5ed364-4282-7dd3-f614-4e62632d81aa@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 10:01:07 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
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 10/19/2018 09:59 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> That looks like a good API in general. The ffs_user_copy_worker that
>> Sebastian mentioned seems to be used by AIO, in which case of course it
>> has to happen in a kernel thread.
>>
>> But while the API is good, deciding on the desired semantics is
>> "interesting". The submitting thread might be changing PKRU between the
>> time the I/O operation is submitted and the time it is completed, for
>> example.
> I think there’s only one sensible answer: capture PKRU at the time of submission.
I think it's much more straightforward to just not enforce pkeys.
Having this "phantom" value could cause a very odd, nearly undebuggable
I/O failure.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists