[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj2tocacYp2vDJZy9NWatdk_YCjoFYkcSGAbKon8anTLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 09:36:11 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>, valentin.schneider@....com,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] objtool: Add UACCESS validation
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 9:30 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> Right, but I was hoping to avoid having to do that; and I think we can
> do that if we push all of kasan_report into an exception, like that
> 'patch' I just posted.
>
> If I'm not mistaken the regular kasan house-keeping crud just prods at
> the shadow memory with simple code and should be perfectly safe.
Fair enough. I do agree it would be nice to not have the save/restore
simply because "it cannot matter" and we have the static tool to prove
that.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists