linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH Part2 RFC v2 10/37] x86/fault: Add support to handle the RMP fault for kernel address

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: <b723e0dd-7af1-37b3-6553-e9ef4802dac8@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 3 May 2021 12:43:41 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de, jroedel@...e.de,
        Thomas.Lendacky@....com, pbonzini@...hat.com, mingo@...hat.com,
        rientjes@...gle.com, seanjc@...gle.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        hpa@...or.com, tony.luck@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH Part2 RFC v2 10/37] x86/fault: Add support to handle the
 RMP fault for kernel address

On 5/3/21 12:41 PM, Brijesh Singh wrote:
> Sure, I will look into all the drivers which do a walk plus kmap to make
> sure that they fail instead of going into the fault path. Should I drop
> this patch or keep it just in the case we miss something?

I think you should drop it, and just ensure that the existing page fault
oops code can produce a coherent, descriptive error message about what
went wrong.