linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 2/2] arm64/io: Add a header for mmio access instrumentation

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 22 Nov 2021 15:30:31 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Sai Prakash Ranjan <quic_saipraka@...cinc.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        quic_psodagud@...cinc.com, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        gregkh <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 2/2] arm64/io: Add a header for mmio access instrumentation

On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 3:19 PM Sai Prakash Ranjan
<quic_saipraka@...cinc.com> wrote:
> On 11/22/2021 7:29 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > I think this would be a lot less confusing to readers, as it is implemented
> > exactly in the place that has the normal definition, and it can also have
> > somewhat more logical semantics by only instrumenting the
> > normal/relaxed/ioport accessors but not the __raw_* versions that
> > are meant to be little more than a pointer dereference.
>
> But how is this different from logic in atomic-instrumented.h which also
> has asm-generic version?
> Initial review few years back mentioned about having something similar
> to atomic instrumentation
> and hence it was implemented with the similar approach keeping
> instrumentation out of arch specific details.

This is only a cosmetic difference. I usually prefer fewer indirections,
and I like the way that include/asm-generic/io.h only has all the
normal 'static inline' definitions spelled out, and calling the __raw_*
versions. Your version adds an extra layer with the arch_raw_readl(),
which I'd prefer to avoid.

> And if we do move this instrumentation to asm-generic/io.h, how will
> that be executed since
> the arch specifc read{b,w,l,q} overrides this generic version?

As I understand it, your version also requires architecture specific
changes, so that would be the same: it only works for architectures
that get the definition of readl()/readl_relaxed()/inl()/... from
include/asm-generic/io.h and only override the __raw version.

      Arnd