linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 25/35] kasan: introduce CONFIG_KASAN_HW

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: <b7884e93-008f-6b9f-32d8-6c03c7e14243@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:33:15 +0100
From:   Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>
To:     Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com
Cc:     Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
        Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
        Elena Petrova <lenaptr@...gle.com>,
        Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@....com>,
        Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/35] kasan: introduce CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS

Hi Andrey,

On 8/14/20 6:27 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> +config·KASAN_HW_TAGS
> +» bool·"Hardware·tag-based·mode"
> +» depends·on·HAVE_ARCH_KASAN_HW_TAGS
> +» depends·on·SLUB
> +» help
> +» ··Enables·hardware·tag-based·KASAN·mode.
> +
> +» ··This·mode·requires·both·Memory·Tagging·Extension·and·Top·Byte·Ignore
> +» ··support·by·the·CPU·and·therefore·is·only·supported·for·modern·arm64
> +» ··CPUs·(MTE·added·in·ARMv8.5·ISA).
> +

I do not thing we should make KASAN_HW_TAGS MTE specific especially because it
is in the common code (e.g. SPARC ADI might want to implement it in future).

Probably would be better to provide some indirection in the generic code an
implement the MTE backend entirely in arch code.

Thoughts?

-- 
Regards,
Vincenzo