On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:09 PM, Cyril Novikov wrote:
> On 1/18/2018 4:01 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>>
>> 'array_ptr' is proposed as a generic mechanism to mitigate against
>> Spectre-variant-1 attacks, i.e. an attack that bypasses boundary checks
>> via speculative execution).
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:09 PM, Cyril Novikov wrote:
> On 1/18/2018 4:01 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>>
>> 'array_ptr' is proposed as a generic mechanism to mitigate against
>> Spectre-variant-1 attacks, i.e. an attack that bypasses boundary checks
>> via speculative execution). The 'array_ptr'
On 1/18/2018 4:01 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
'array_ptr' is proposed as a generic mechanism to mitigate against
Spectre-variant-1 attacks, i.e. an attack that bypasses boundary checks
via speculative execution). The 'array_ptr' implementation is expected
to be safe for current generation cpus
On 1/18/2018 4:01 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
'array_ptr' is proposed as a generic mechanism to mitigate against
Spectre-variant-1 attacks, i.e. an attack that bypasses boundary checks
via speculative execution). The 'array_ptr' implementation is expected
to be safe for current generation cpus
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 2:20 AM, Jann Horn wrote:
>>> + \
>>> + __u._ptr = _arr + (_i & _mask);
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 2:20 AM, Jann Horn wrote:
>>> + \
>>> + __u._ptr = _arr + (_i & _mask); \
>>> + __u._bit &= _mask;
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:12:47AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > [ adding Alexei back to the cc ]
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Adam Sampson wrote:
> > > Jann Horn writes:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:12:47AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > [ adding Alexei back to the cc ]
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Adam Sampson wrote:
> > > Jann Horn writes:
> > >
> > >>> +/*
> > >>> + * If idx is negative or if
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 2:20 AM, Jann Horn wrote:
>> + \
>> + __u._ptr = _arr + (_i & _mask); \
>> + __u._bit &= _mask;
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 2:20 AM, Jann Horn wrote:
>> + \
>> + __u._ptr = _arr + (_i & _mask); \
>> + __u._bit &= _mask; \
>
> AFAICS, if
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:12:47AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> [ adding Alexei back to the cc ]
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Adam Sampson wrote:
> > Jann Horn writes:
> >
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * If idx is negative or if idx > size then bit 63 is set in the
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:12:47AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> [ adding Alexei back to the cc ]
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Adam Sampson wrote:
> > Jann Horn writes:
> >
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * If idx is negative or if idx > size then bit 63 is set in the mask,
> >>> + * and the value of
Jann Horn writes:
>> +/*
>> + * If idx is negative or if idx > size then bit 63 is set in the mask,
>> + * and the value of ~(-1L) is zero. When the mask is zero, bounds check
>> + * failed, array_ptr will return NULL.
>> + */
>> +#ifndef array_ptr_mask
>> +static inline
Jann Horn writes:
>> +/*
>> + * If idx is negative or if idx > size then bit 63 is set in the mask,
>> + * and the value of ~(-1L) is zero. When the mask is zero, bounds check
>> + * failed, array_ptr will return NULL.
>> + */
>> +#ifndef array_ptr_mask
>> +static inline unsigned long
[ adding Alexei back to the cc ]
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Adam Sampson wrote:
> Jann Horn writes:
>
>>> +/*
>>> + * If idx is negative or if idx > size then bit 63 is set in the mask,
>>> + * and the value of ~(-1L) is zero. When the mask is zero,
[ adding Alexei back to the cc ]
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Adam Sampson wrote:
> Jann Horn writes:
>
>>> +/*
>>> + * If idx is negative or if idx > size then bit 63 is set in the mask,
>>> + * and the value of ~(-1L) is zero. When the mask is zero, bounds check
>>> + * failed, array_ptr
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> 'array_ptr' is proposed as a generic mechanism to mitigate against
> Spectre-variant-1 attacks, i.e. an attack that bypasses boundary checks
> via speculative execution). The 'array_ptr' implementation is expected
>
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> 'array_ptr' is proposed as a generic mechanism to mitigate against
> Spectre-variant-1 attacks, i.e. an attack that bypasses boundary checks
> via speculative execution). The 'array_ptr' implementation is expected
> to be safe for current
'array_ptr' is proposed as a generic mechanism to mitigate against
Spectre-variant-1 attacks, i.e. an attack that bypasses boundary checks
via speculative execution). The 'array_ptr' implementation is expected
to be safe for current generation cpus across multiple architectures
(ARM, x86).
Based
'array_ptr' is proposed as a generic mechanism to mitigate against
Spectre-variant-1 attacks, i.e. an attack that bypasses boundary checks
via speculative execution). The 'array_ptr' implementation is expected
to be safe for current generation cpus across multiple architectures
(ARM, x86).
Based
20 matches
Mail list logo