From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
Evgeniy Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
Lee Smith <Lee.Smith@arm.com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
Jacob Bramley <Jacob.Bramley@arm.com>,
Ruben Ayrapetyan <Ruben.Ayrapetyan@arm.com>,
Chintan Pandya <cpandya@codeaurora.org>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>,
Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com>,
khalid.aziz@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 00/13] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 11:25:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190320112545.GB25040@arrakis.emea.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190319113212.ca1d56301112454dfb5a39ba@linux-foundation.org>
On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 11:32:12AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 18:17:32 +0100 Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> wrote:
> > === Notes
> >
> > This patchset is meant to be merged together with "arm64 relaxed ABI" [3].
>
> What does this mean, precisely? That neither series is useful without
> the other? That either patchset will break things without the other?
This series does the work of relaxing the ABI w.r.t. pointer syscall
arguments for arm64 (while preserving backwards compatibility, we can't
break this). Vincenzo's patches [1] document the ABI relaxation and
introduce an AT_FLAG bit by which user space can check for the presence
of such support. So I'd say [1] goes on top of this series.
Once we agreed on the ABI definition, they should be posted as a single
series.
> Only a small fraction of these patches carry evidence of having been
> reviewed. Fixable?
That's fixable, though the discussions go back to last summer mostly at
a higher level: are we sure these are the only places that need
patching? The outcome of such discussions was a document clarifying
which pointers user can tag and pass to the kernel based on the origins
of the memory range (e.g. anonymous mmap()).
I'd very much like to get input from the SPARC ADI guys on these series
(cc'ing Khalid). While currently for arm64 that's just a software
feature (the hardware one, MTE - memory tagging extensions, is coming
later), the ADI has similar requirements regarding the user ABI. AFAICT
from the SPARC example code, the user is not allowed to pass a tagged
pointers (non-zero top byte) into the kernel. Feedback from the Google
hwasan guys is that such approach is not practical for a generic
deployment of this feature (e.g. automatic tagging of heap allocations).
> Which maintainer tree would be appropriate for carrying these patches?
Given that the arm64 changes are fairly minimal, the -mm tree works for
me (once I reviewed/acked the patches and, ideally, get the SPARC people
onboard with such approach).
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/3/18/819
--
Catalin
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-20 11:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-18 17:17 Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 01/13] uaccess: add untagged_addr definition for other arches Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 02/13] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and __uaccess_mask_ptr Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 03/13] lib, arm64: untag user pointers in strn*_user Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 04/13] mm, arm64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 05/13] mm, arm64: untag user pointers in mm/gup.c Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 06/13] fs, arm64: untag user pointers in copy_mount_options Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 07/13] fs, arm64: untag user pointers in fs/userfaultfd.c Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 08/13] net, arm64: untag user pointers in tcp_zerocopy_receive Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-19 16:14 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 09/13] kernel, arm64: untag user pointers in prctl_set_mm* Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 10/13] tracing, arm64: untag user pointers in seq_print_user_ip Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 11/13] uprobes, arm64: untag user pointers in find_active_uprobe Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 12/13] bpf, arm64: untag user pointers in stack_map_get_build_id_offset Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 17:17 ` [PATCH v12 13/13] selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-19 18:32 ` [PATCH v12 00/13] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel Andrew Morton
2019-03-20 11:25 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190320112545.GB25040@arrakis.emea.arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=Jacob.Bramley@arm.com \
--cc=Lee.Smith@arm.com \
--cc=Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com \
--cc=Ruben.Ayrapetyan@arm.com \
--cc=Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreyknvl@google.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cpandya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eugenis@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kcc@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kevin.brodsky@arm.com \
--cc=khalid.aziz@oracle.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox