From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 13:37:50 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: mm: don't print out page table entries on EL0 faults In-Reply-To: <59b82477-b937-0ffb-6cf1-d86e9b0488ba@arm.com> References: <1495453554-9412-1-git-send-email-kristina.martsenko@arm.com> <1495453554-9412-2-git-send-email-kristina.martsenko@arm.com> <20170522122115.GF1107@arm.com> <59b82477-b937-0ffb-6cf1-d86e9b0488ba@arm.com> Message-ID: <20170601123750.GG12832@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 08:38:00PM +0100, Kristina Martsenko wrote: > On 22/05/17 13:21, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:45:54PM +0100, Kristina Martsenko wrote: > >> When we take a fault from EL0 that can't be handled, we print out the > >> page table entries associated with the faulting address. This allows > >> userspace to print out any current page table entries, including kernel > >> (TTBR1) entries. Exposing kernel mappings like this could pose a > >> security risk, so don't print out page table information on EL0 faults. > >> (But still print it out for EL1 faults.) > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Kristina Martsenko > > > > It might be worth mentioning that this follows the same behaviour as x86. > > Yep. > > > In fact, they print the name of the faulting VMA using print_vma_addr, > > which might be useful too. > > Looks useful, should I add that in a separate patch in v2? Sure, works for me. Will