On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:18PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> This patch allows tagged pointers to be
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:23PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> tcp_zerocopy_receive() uses provided
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:25PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> seq_print_user_ip() uses provided user
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:31PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> videobuf_dma_contig_user_get() uses
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:29PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> radeon_ttm_tt_pin_userptr() uses
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:24PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> @@ -2120,13 +2135,14 @@ static int prctl_set_mm(int opt, unsigned long addr,
> if (opt == PR_SET_MM_AUXV)
> return prctl_set_auxv(mm, addr, arg4);
>
> - if (addr >= TASK_SIZE || addr < mmap_min_addr)
> +
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:27PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> stack_map_get_build_id_offset() uses
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:32PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> check_mem_type() uses provided user
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:26PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> find_active_uprobe() uses user pointers
Hi Andrey,
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:46PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> One of the alternative approaches to untagging that was considered is to
> completely strip the pointer tag as the pointer enters the kernel with
> some kind of a syscall wrapper, but that won't work with the countless
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> This patch allows tagged pointers to be
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> +SYSCALL_DEFINE5(arm64_get_mempolicy, int __user *, policy,
> + unsigned long __user *, nmask, unsigned long, maxnode,
> + unsigned long, addr, unsigned long, flags)
> +{
> + addr = untagged_addr(addr);
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 04:21:48PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:16 PM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:31:03PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 06:24:06PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 6:20 PM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 04:29:10PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 7:15 PM Catalin Marinas
> > > wrote
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:11:26PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:14:45PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > Thanks for a lot of valuable input! I've read through all the replies
> > and got somewhat lost. What are the changes I need to do to this
> > series?
> >
> >
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 01:42:25PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 05:34:00PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:56:45PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:40:58PM +0100, Cat
Hi Khalid,
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 05:33:04PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-05-28 at 16:40 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > I think another aspect is how we define the ABI. Is allowing tags to
> > mlock() for example something specific to arm64 or would sparc ADI
&g
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 01:16:37PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On 5/29/19 8:20 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 05:33:04PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> >> Steps 1 and 2 are accomplished by userspace by calling mprotect() with
> >> PROT_ADI. T
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> /*
> * Wrappers to pass the pt_regs argument.
> */
> #define sys_personality sys_arm64_personality
> +#define sys_mmap_pgoff sys_arm64_mmap_pgoff
> +#define sys_mremap sys_arm64_mremap
>
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 03:54:11PM +0100, Andrew Murray wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 03:37:20PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:56:45PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:40:58PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > My thoughts on allowing tags (quick look):
> >
> > brk - no
>
> [...]
>
> > mlock, mlock2, munlock - y
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:14:45PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Thanks for a lot of valuable input! I've read through all the replies
> and got somewhat lost. What are the changes I need to do to this
> series?
>
> 1. Should I move untagging for memory syscalls back to the generic
> code so
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:05:55AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On 5/30/19 9:11 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > So if a database program is doing an anonymous mmap(PROT_TBI) of 100GB,
> > IIUC for sparc the faulted-in pages will have random colours (on 64-byte
> > g
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 02:31:16PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> syzkaller already attempts to randomly inject non-canonical and
> 0x addresses for user pointers in syscalls in an effort to
> find bugs like CVE-2017-5123 where waitid() via unchecked put_user() was
> able to write directly
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> +SYSCALL_DEFINE2(arm64_mlock2, unsigned long, start, size_t, len)
> +{
> + start = untagged_addr(start);
> + return ksys_mlock(start, len, VM_LOCKED);
> +}
Copy/paste error: sys_mlock2() has 3 arguments and should call
Hi Vincenzo,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 06:09:10PM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> > index 3767fb21a5b8..69d0be1fc708 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
e provided user pointers for vma lookups, which can
> only by done with untagged pointers.
>
> Untag user pointers in validate_range().
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
s provided user pointers for vma lookups, which can
> only by done with untagged pointers.
>
> Untag user pointers in this function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 03:09:26PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 3:02 PM Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 02:45:32PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 02:18:19PM
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:03:10PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 7:39 PM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 07:09:46PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > Should I drop access_ok() change from my patch, sin
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 06:53:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> > b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> > index e5d5f31c6d36..9164ecb5feca 100644
> &g
s a simple test, that calls the uname syscall with a
> tagged user pointer as an argument. Without the kernel accepting tagged
> user pointers the test fails with EFAULT.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
BTW, you could add
Co-developed-by: Catalin Marinas
since I wrote the malloc() e
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 07:09:46PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:57 PM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 06:53:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 05:35:31PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:28 PM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:07PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 07:18:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:01 PM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > static void *tag_ptr(void *ptr)
> > {
> > static int tagged_addr_err = 1;
> > unsigned long tag = 0;
> >
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> From: Catalin Marinas
>
> It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into
> the kernel indiscriminately. This patch introduces a prctl() interface
> for enabling or disabling the tagged AB
d user pointers for vma lookups, which can
> only by done with untagged pointers.
>
> Untag user pointers in validate_range().
>
> Reviewed-by: Vincenzo Frascino
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
> ---
> fs/u
ag the address before subtracting.
>
> Reviewed-by: Khalid Aziz
> Reviewed-by: Vincenzo Frascino
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
> ---
> fs/namespace.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 04:45:54PM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
> On 13/06/2019 16:35, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 12:16:59PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >>> +
> >
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 12:16:59PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > From: Catalin Marinas
> >
> > It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into
> > the kernel indiscrimina
Hi Dave,
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 12:02:35PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Global sysctl to disable the tagged user addresses support. This control
> > + * only prevents the tagged address ABI enabling via prctl()
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> From: Catalin Marinas
>
> It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into
> the kernel indiscriminately. This patch introduces a prctl() interface
> for enabling or disabling the tagged AB
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:30:36PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> On 12/06/2019 12:43, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/tags_lib.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > +
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +
> > +#define
not currently accept tagged hint addresses.
Architectures may interpret the hint tag as a background colour for the
corresponding vma. With this:
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
--
Catalin
s provided user pointers for vma lookups, which can
> only by done with untagged pointers. Instead of locating and changing
> all callers of this function, perform untagging in it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
Acked-by: Catalin Marinas
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 09:57:36AM -0700, Evgenii Stepanov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 6:56 AM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > From: Catalin Marinas
> > >
> > > It is not desirabl
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 04:45:02PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 1:43 PM Andrey Konovalov
> wrote:
> > From: Catalin Marinas
> >
> > It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into
> > the kernel indiscriminately.
bled = 0;
> + struct utsname *ptr, *tagged_ptr;
> + int err;
> +
> + if (prctl(PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL, PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE, 0, 0, 0) == 0)
> + tbi_enabled = 1;
Nitpick: with the latest prctl() patch, you can skip the last three
arguments as they are ignored.
Either way:
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
d user pointers for vma lookups, which can
> only by done with untagged pointers.
>
> Untag user pointers in this function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx4/mr.c | 7 ---
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Acke
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> index e5d5f31c6d36..9164ecb5feca 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 11:07:03AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 06:53:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:55:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> > > b/arch/
ly untags the pointers to perform
> validity checks, but then uses them as is to perform user memory accesses.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
Just to keep track of where I am with the reviews while the ABI
discussion continues:
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> This patch allows tagged pointers to be
r vma lookups.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
ect_pkey -> ksys_mprotect_pkey), mremap, msync,
> munlock, munmap, remap_file_pages, shmat, shmdt.
>
> The next patch in this series will add a custom implementation for these
> syscalls that makes them accept tagged pointers on arm64.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
Hi Kees,
Thanks for joining the thread ;).
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 05:04:39PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 07:29:33PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 04:53:07PM -0700, Evgenii Stepanov wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 7:49
_move() is used in the implementation of the move_pages syscall.
>
> Untag user pointers in this function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
ag the address before subtracting.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:31:03PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> This patch adds a simple test, that
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 08:30:21AM -0700, enh wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 3:11 AM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 05:04:39PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > I just want to make sure I fully understand your concern about this
> > > being
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 04:09:31PM -0700, enh wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:03 PM Evgenii Stepanov wrote:
> > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 1:47 PM Kees Cook wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 05:35:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > I would also expect t
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 12:21:27PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> If a process wants to not tag, that's also up to the allocator where
> it can decide not to ask the kernel, and just not tag. Nothing breaks in
> userspace if a process is NOT tagging and untagged_addr() exists or is
> missing. This, I
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 09:58:22AM -0700, enh wrote:
> i was questioning the argument about the ioctl issues, and saying that
> from my perspective, untagging bugs are not really any different than
> any other kind of kernel bug.
Once this series gets in, they are indeed just kernel bugs. What I
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 01:47:36PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 05:35:27PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > The two hard requirements I have for supporting any new hardware feature
> > in Linux are (1) a single kernel image binary continues to run on old
>
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:42:57AM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 09:20:52PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 02:49:28PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > If multiple people will care about this, perhaps we should try to
> > > annotate types more
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 08:44:12AM -0700, enh wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 7:45 AM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 01:47:36PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > For userspace, how would a future binary choose TBI over MTE? If it's
> > > a libr
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 09:38:19AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 03:44:49PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > There is also the obvious requirement which I didn't mention: new user
> > space continues to run on new/subsequent kernel versions. That's one of
Hi Khalid,
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:51:40AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On 5/21/19 6:04 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > As an aside: I think Sparc ADI support in Linux actually side-stepped
> > this[1] (i.e. chose "solution 1"): "All addresses passed to kernel must
> > be non-ADI tagged addresses."
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 03:49:05PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On 5/23/19 2:11 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:51:40AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> >> On 5/21/19 6:04 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> >>> As an aside: I think Sparc ADI support
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 02:31:16PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 06:43:46PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 09:38:19AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > What about testing tools that intentionally insert high bits for syscalls
> &g
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 02:16:57PM -0700, Evgenii Stepanov wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:49 AM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 04:53:07PM -0700, Evgenii Stepanov wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 7:49 AM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > IMO (RFC for now), I see two ways forward:
> >
> > 1. Make this a user space problem and do not allow tagged pointers into
> >the sys
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 03:25:04PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> get_vaddr_frames uses provided user
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 03:25:06PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> userfaultfd_register() and
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 03:25:09PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> mlx4_get_umem_mr() uses provided user
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 06:44:34PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:41 PM Catalin Marinas
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:24PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > @@ -2120,13 +2135,14 @@ static int prctl_set_mm(int opt, unsi
t; IB/mlx4: untag user pointers in mlx4_get_umem_mr
> media/v4l2-core: untag user pointers in videobuf_dma_contig_user_get
> tee/shm: untag user pointers in tee_shm_register
> vfio/type1: untag user pointers in vaddr_get_pfn
> selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers
On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 08:36:47AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 8/1/19 5:48 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 2:11 PM Kevin Brodsky wrote:
> >> On 31/07/2019 17:50, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >>> On 7/23/19 10:58 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> The mmap and mremap (only
On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 09:45:05AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 8/1/19 5:38 AM, Kevin Brodsky wrote:
> > This patch series only changes what is allowed or not at the syscall
> > interface. It does not change the address space size. On arm64, TBI (Top
> > Byte Ignore) has always been enabled for
On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 04:09:04PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 03:33:00PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:12:19 -0700 Kees Cook wrote:
> >
> > > > The ones that are left are the mm ones: 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew, could you take a look
colour for the
> corresponding vma.
>
> Reviewed-by: Khalid Aziz
> Reviewed-by: Vincenzo Frascino
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov
> ---
> mm/madvise.c | 2 ++
> mm/mempolicy.c | 3 +++
> mm/mi
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 07:58:39PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> From: Catalin Marinas
>
> It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into
> the kernel indiscriminately. This patch introduces a prctl() interface
> for enabling or disabling the tagged AB
82 matches
Mail list logo
