linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] munmap() vs unmap_mapping

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: <YtkQNA4jkhfEfWzs@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:37:08 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] munmap() vs unmap_mapping_range()

On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 09:18:02AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> These 4 patches implement the suggestion by Linus.
> 
> The first patch nukes all architecture implementations of tlb_{start,end}_vma()
> by adding two additional MMU_GATHER config knobs.
> 
> DaveM, please clarify the sparc64 case, it seems a little odd to have
> flush_cache_range() but to explicitly not call it at unmap time. It would be
> nice to remove this one special case.
> 
> The second patch isn't strictly needed for this series but since I was looking
> at all this, I figured C-SKY didn't make a whole lot of sense. Guo, please
> have a look.
> 
> The third patch cleans up the #ifdeffery and provides a single
> tlb_{start,end}_vma() implementation for everyone.
> 
> The fourth, and final, patch does the force TLB-flush on VM_PFNMAP thing.
> 
> I've had the first three patches exposed to the robots and they've (so far) not
> reported build (or other) fail.
> 

What are we doing with these patches? Andrew will you pick them up, or
will I smuggle them in x86/mm or something ?