netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 6/9] riscv, bpf: provide RISC-V specific JIT image alloc/free

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: <881b35d6-23ce-fac3-23b8-cdd4d70fa106@ghiti.fr>
Date:   Mon, 3 Feb 2020 15:57:55 -0500
From:   Alex Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>
To:     Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com>
Cc:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
        vincent.chen@...ive.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 6/9] riscv, bpf: provide RISC-V specific JIT
 image alloc/free

On 2/3/20 7:28 AM, Björn Töpel wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 14:37, Alex Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr> wrote:
> [...]
>> I think it would be better to completely avoid this patch and the
>> definition of this
>> new zone by using the generic implementation if we had the patch
>> discussed here
>> regarding modules memory allocation (that in any case we need to fix
>> modules loading):
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/d868acf5-7242-93dc-0051-f97e64dc4387@ghiti.fr/T/#m2be30cb71dc9aa834a50d346961acee26158a238
>>
> This patch is already upstream. I agree that when the module
> allocation fix is upstream, the BPF image allocation can be folded
> into the module allocation. IOW, I wont send any page table dumper
> patch for BPF memory.


Too late then :) I'll remove this zone with the patch regarding module
allocation.


>
> But keep in mind that the RV BPF JIT relies on having the kernel text
> within the 32b range (as does modules)


Yep, same constraints as for modules ;)

Thanks,

Alex


>
> Cheers,
> Björn