[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrUsqCzU6VO0h4EFpsdXOOn-kJY7ogwKQiQScNY9YJ6hWA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 11:49:17 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/ldt: Unmap PTEs for the slow before freeing LDT
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 9:32 AM Kirill A. Shutemov
<kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> modify_ldt(2) leaves old LDT mapped after we switch over to the new one.
> Memory for the old LDT gets freed and the pages can be re-used.
>
> Leaving the mapping in place can have security implications. The mapping
> is present in userspace copy of page tables and Meltdown-like attack can
> read these freed and possibly reused pages.
Code looks okay. But:
> - /*
> - * Did we already have the top level entry allocated? We can't
> - * use pgd_none() for this because it doens't do anything on
> - * 4-level page table kernels.
> - */
> - pgd = pgd_offset(mm, LDT_BASE_ADDR);
This looks like an unrelated cleanup. Can it be its own patch?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists