linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 10/12] x86/mm: Implement HAVE_ARCH_UNMAPPED_AREA

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: <14a2bc3add91981fe2f9d51d2b25507dc1c69131.camel@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 16:00:04 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "debug@...osinc.com" <debug@...osinc.com>, "luto@...nel.org"
	<luto@...nel.org>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"Liam.Howlett@...cle.com" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, "broonie@...nel.org"
	<broonie@...nel.org>, "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
	"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "hpa@...or.com"
	<hpa@...or.com>, "christophe.leroy@...roup.eu" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "mingo@...hat.com"
	<mingo@...hat.com>, "kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com"
	<kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "peterz@...radead.org"
	<peterz@...radead.org>
CC: "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/12] x86/mm: Implement
 HAVE_ARCH_UNMAPPED_AREA_VMFLAGS

On Wed, 2024-03-13 at 09:04 +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > +
> > +unsigned long
> > +arch_get_unmapped_area(struct file *filp, unsigned long addr,
> > +               unsigned long len, unsigned long pgoff, unsigned
> > long flags)
> > +{
> > +       return arch_get_unmapped_area_vmflags(filp, addr, len,
> > pgoff, flags, 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +unsigned long
> > +arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown(struct file *filp, const unsigned
> > long addr,
> > +                         const unsigned long len, const unsigned
> > long pgoff,
> > +                         const unsigned long flags)
> > +{
> > +       return arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown_vmflags(filp, addr,
> > len, pgoff, flags, 0);
> > +}
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to define those two as static inlines ?

Yes, I think so. It is generic functionality (though not needed until
the next shadow stack feature), so doesn't need to be in arch/x86
either.

Thanks for your comments on the series and the RB tags.