[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202007161354.62030182F@keescook>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:55:11 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Keno Fischer <keno@...iacomputing.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch V3 02/13] entry: Provide generic syscall exit function
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 08:22:10PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>
> Like syscall entry all architectures have similar and pointlessly different
> code to handle pending work before returning from a syscall to user space.
>
> 1) One-time syscall exit work:
> - rseq syscall exit
> - audit
> - syscall tracing
> - tracehook (single stepping)
>
> 2) Preparatory work
> - Exit to user mode loop (common TIF handling).
> - Architecture specific one time work arch_exit_to_user_mode_prepare()
> - Address limit and lockdep checks
>
> 3) Final transition (lockdep, tracing, context tracking, RCU). Invokes
> arch_exit_to_user_mode() to handle e.g. speculation mitigations
>
> Provide a generic version based on the x86 code which has all the RCU and
> instrumentation protections right.
>
> Provide a variant for interrupt return to user mode as well which shares
> the above #2 and #3 work items.
>
> After syscall_exit_to_user_mode() and irqentry_exit_to_user_mode() the
> architecture code just has to return to user space. The code after
> returning from these functions must not be instrumented.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
This looks correct to me. Did you happen to run the seccomp selftests
under this series?
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists