[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210324071357.GB2639075@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 07:13:57 +0000
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/17] mm: add generic __va_function and __pa_function
macros
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 01:39:32PM -0700, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> With CONFIG_CFI_CLANG, the compiler replaces function addresses
> in instrumented C code with jump table addresses. This means that
> __pa_symbol(function) returns the physical address of the jump table
> entry instead of the actual function, which may not work as the jump
> table code will immediately jump to a virtual address that may not be
> mapped.
>
> To avoid this address space confusion, this change adds generic
> definitions for __va_function and __pa_function, which architectures
> that support CFI can override. The typical implementation of the
> __va_function macro would use inline assembly to take the function
> address, which avoids compiler instrumentation.
I think these helper are sensible, but shouldn't they have somewhat
less arcane names and proper documentation?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists