[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210730003354.xahfbqnjnkexvxh6@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 03:33:54 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] x86/sgx: Provide indication of life-cycle of EPC
pages
On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 03:12:03PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 7/28/21 1:46 PM, Tony Luck wrote:
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c
> > @@ -581,7 +581,7 @@ struct sgx_epc_page *sgx_alloc_epc_page(void *owner, bool reclaim)
> > for ( ; ; ) {
> > page = __sgx_alloc_epc_page();
> > if (!IS_ERR(page)) {
> > - page->owner = owner;
> > + page->owner = owner ? owner : page;
> > break;
> > }
>
> I'm a little worried about this.
>
> Let's say we get confused about the type of the page and dereference
> page->owner. If it's NULL, we get a nice oops. If it's a real, valid
> pointer, we get real valid memory back that we can scribble on.
>
> Wouldn't it be safer to do something like:
>
> page->owner = owner ? owner : (void *)-1;
>
> -1 is non-NULL, but also invalid, which makes it harder for us to poke
> ourselves in the eye.
Works for me.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists