[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cd5e3eb792474e41bca1bd04d1747c9a@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 22:45:00 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Dave Hansen' <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Eugene Syromiatnikov" <esyr@...hat.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
"H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"Ravi V . Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Weijiang Yang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"joao.moreira@...el.com" <joao.moreira@...el.com>,
John Allen <john.allen@....com>,
"kcc@...gle.com" <kcc@...gle.com>,
"eranian@...gle.com" <eranian@...gle.com>
CC: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 20/35] mm: Update can_follow_write_pte() for shadow stack
From: Dave Hansen
> Sent: 09 February 2022 22:52
>
> On 1/30/22 13:18, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> > Like a writable data page, a shadow stack page is writable, and becomes
> > read-only during copy-on-write, but it is always dirty.
>
> One other thing...
>
> The language in these changelogs is a bit sloppy. For instance, what
> does "always dirty" mean here? pte_dirty()? Or strictly _PAGE_DIRTY?
>
> In other words, logically dirty, or literally "has *the* dirty bit set"?
Doesn't COW have to set it readonly - so that the access faults.
And then set the fault code set it readonly+dirty (without write)
to allow the shadow stack accesses to not-fault.
Or am I mis-guessing what the docs actually say?
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists