linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v19 00/15] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <f27f4e55-fcd6-9ae7-d9ca-cac2aea5fe70@arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Jul 2019 18:12:20 +0100
From:   Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>
To:     Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
        Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
        Jacob Bramley <Jacob.Bramley@....com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
        Evgeniy Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Ruben Ayrapetyan <Ruben.Ayrapetyan@....com>,
        Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@....com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
        Lee Smith <Lee.Smith@....com>,
        Alexander Deucher <Alexander.Deucher@....com>,
        enh <enh@...gle.com>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Christian Koenig <Christian.Koenig@....com>,
        Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 00/15] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

Hi Will and Andrey,

On 24/07/2019 15:20, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:16:49PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 4:02 PM Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:03:29PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 7:59 PM Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> === Overview
>>>>>
>>>>> arm64 has a feature called Top Byte Ignore, which allows to embed pointer
>>>>> tags into the top byte of each pointer. Userspace programs (such as
>>>>> HWASan, a memory debugging tool [1]) might use this feature and pass
>>>>> tagged user pointers to the kernel through syscalls or other interfaces.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now the kernel is already able to handle user faults with tagged
>>>>> pointers, due to these patches:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. 81cddd65 ("arm64: traps: fix userspace cache maintenance emulation on a
>>>>>              tagged pointer")
>>>>> 2. 7dcd9dd8 ("arm64: hw_breakpoint: fix watchpoint matching for tagged
>>>>>               pointers")
>>>>> 3. 276e9327 ("arm64: entry: improve data abort handling of tagged
>>>>>               pointers")
>>>>>
>>>>> This patchset extends tagged pointer support to syscall arguments.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> Do you think this is ready to be merged?
>>>>
>>>> Should this go through the mm or the arm tree?
>>>
>>> I would certainly prefer to take at least the arm64 bits via the arm64 tree
>>> (i.e. patches 1, 2 and 15). We also need a Documentation patch describing
>>> the new ABI.
>>
>> Sounds good! Should I post those patches together with the
>> Documentation patches from Vincenzo as a separate patchset?
> 
> Yes, please (although as you say below, we need a new version of those
> patches from Vincenzo to address the feedback on v5). The other thing I
> should say is that I'd be happy to queue the other patches in the series
> too, but some of them are missing acks from the relevant maintainers (e.g.
> the mm/ and fs/ changes).
> 

I am actively working on the document and will share v6 with the requested
changes in the next few days.

> Will
> 

-- 
Regards,
Vincenzo