linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: clean up trampoline vector loads

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 24 Mar 2020 11:23:17 +0000
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi@...lab.net>,
        will@...nel.org, james.morse@....com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: clean up trampoline vector loads

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:52:17AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 10:42:30PM +0200, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> > Le maanantaina 23. maaliskuuta 2020, 21.04.09 EET Catalin Marinas a écrit :
> > > Should we just use adrp on __entry_tramp_data_start? Anyway, the diff
> > > below doesn't solve the issue I'm seeing (only reverting patch 3).
> > 
> > AFAIU, the preexisting code uses the manual PAGE_SIZE offset because the offset 
> > in the main vmlinux does not match the architected offset inside the fixmap. If 
> > so, then using the symbol directly will not work at all.
> 
> Indeed. I can't see a neat way of avoiding this right now, so should we
> drop these patches and leave the code as-is (but with comments as to the
> special requirements that it has)?

I'm going to drop these three patches from -next for now but I can take
any updated comments (they are pretty much missing from this code).

Thanks.

-- 
Catalin