linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] arm64/mm: Ensure lazy_mmu

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250612162132.GB13202@willie-the-truck>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 17:21:33 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] arm64/mm: Ensure lazy_mmu_mode never nests

On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 05:00:51PM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> On 12/06/2025 15:59, Will Deacon wrote:
> > To be honest, I don't think the proposal in this series is really
> > improving what we have. Either we support nested lazy mode or we don't;
> > having __kernel_map_pages() mess around with the lazy mmu state because
> > it somehow knows that set_memory_valid() is going to use it is fragile
> > and ugly.
> > 
> > So I'm incined to leave the current code as-is, unless we can remove it
> > in favour of teaching the core code how to handle it instead.
> 
> Yeah fair enough. I'm not going to have time to do the proper nesting support
> thing. But I'll see if I can find someone internally that I might be able to
> convince. If not, we'll just leave as is.

Sounds fine by me, thanks Ryan.

Will