From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Indan Zupancic <indan@nul.nu>,
Roland McGrath <mcgrathr@google.com>,
Eric Paris <netdev@parisplace.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, mingo@redhat.com,
oleg@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, rdunlap@xenotime.net,
tglx@linutronix.de, luto@mit.edu, eparis@redhat.com,
serge.hallyn@canonical.com, pmoore@redhat.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, corbet@lwn.net,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com, markus@chromium.org,
coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, keescook@chromium.org
Subject: [kernel-hardening] Re: seccomp and ptrace. what is the correct order?
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:37:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FBC0733.8030106@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABqD9haL4pZHJOODh88=HVAJo8DBDJtQAJtSf_L-+518kgEqwg@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/22/2012 02:14 PM, Will Drewry wrote:
>>
>> I suspect the construction of those inlines can be improved.
>
> Seems likely - or just my use of them :)
>
One thing that could make the code worse is if you are in a flow where
the state of the TS_COMPAT flag is known but gcc doesn't know that. I
don't have an easy answer for that.
-hpa
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Indan Zupancic <indan@nul.nu>,
Roland McGrath <mcgrathr@google.com>,
Eric Paris <netdev@parisplace.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, mingo@redhat.com,
oleg@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, rdunlap@xenotime.net,
tglx@linutronix.de, luto@mit.edu, eparis@redhat.com,
serge.hallyn@canonical.com, pmoore@redhat.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, corbet@lwn.net,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com, markus@chromium.org,
coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, keescook@chromium.org
Subject: Re: seccomp and ptrace. what is the correct order?
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:37:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FBC0733.8030106@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABqD9haL4pZHJOODh88=HVAJo8DBDJtQAJtSf_L-+518kgEqwg@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/22/2012 02:14 PM, Will Drewry wrote:
>>
>> I suspect the construction of those inlines can be improved.
>
> Seems likely - or just my use of them :)
>
One thing that could make the code worse is if you are in a flow where
the state of the TS_COMPAT flag is known but gcc doesn't know that. I
don't have an easy answer for that.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-22 21:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-21 18:21 [kernel-hardening] seccomp and ptrace. what is the correct order? Eric Paris
2012-05-21 18:21 ` Eric Paris
2012-05-21 18:25 ` [kernel-hardening] " Roland McGrath
2012-05-21 18:25 ` Roland McGrath
2012-05-21 18:40 ` [kernel-hardening] " Andrew Lutomirski
2012-05-21 19:20 ` Indan Zupancic
2012-05-21 19:20 ` Indan Zupancic
2012-05-22 16:23 ` [kernel-hardening] " Will Drewry
2012-05-22 16:23 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-22 16:26 ` [kernel-hardening] " Will Drewry
2012-05-22 16:26 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-22 17:39 ` [kernel-hardening] " Al Viro
2012-05-22 17:39 ` Al Viro
2012-05-22 20:26 ` [kernel-hardening] " Will Drewry
2012-05-22 20:26 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-22 20:34 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-22 20:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-22 20:48 ` [kernel-hardening] " Will Drewry
2012-05-22 20:48 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-22 21:07 ` [kernel-hardening] " Al Viro
2012-05-22 21:07 ` Al Viro
2012-05-22 21:17 ` [kernel-hardening] " Roland McGrath
2012-05-22 21:17 ` Roland McGrath
2012-05-22 21:18 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-22 21:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-22 22:20 ` [kernel-hardening] " Al Viro
2012-05-22 22:20 ` Al Viro
2012-05-22 21:09 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-22 21:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-22 21:14 ` [kernel-hardening] " Will Drewry
2012-05-22 21:14 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-22 21:37 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2012-05-22 21:37 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-24 16:07 ` [kernel-hardening] [RFC PATCH 0/3] move the secure_computing call Will Drewry
2012-05-24 16:07 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-24 16:07 ` [kernel-hardening] [RFC PATCH 1/3] seccomp: Don't allow tracers to abuse RET_TRACE Will Drewry
2012-05-24 16:07 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-24 17:54 ` [kernel-hardening] " Indan Zupancic
2012-05-24 17:54 ` Indan Zupancic
2012-05-24 18:24 ` [kernel-hardening] " Will Drewry
2012-05-24 18:24 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-24 20:17 ` [kernel-hardening] " Indan Zupancic
2012-05-24 20:17 ` Indan Zupancic
2012-05-24 16:08 ` [kernel-hardening] [RFC PATCH 2/3] arch/x86: move secure_computing after ptrace Will Drewry
2012-05-24 16:08 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-24 16:08 ` [kernel-hardening] [RFC PATCH 3/3] arch/*: move secure_computing after trace Will Drewry
2012-05-24 16:08 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-24 16:13 ` [kernel-hardening] Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] move the secure_computing call H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-24 16:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-24 18:07 ` [kernel-hardening] " Roland McGrath
2012-05-24 18:07 ` Roland McGrath
2012-05-24 18:27 ` [kernel-hardening] " Indan Zupancic
2012-05-24 18:27 ` Indan Zupancic
2012-05-24 18:45 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-24 18:45 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-24 19:39 ` [kernel-hardening] " Indan Zupancic
2012-05-24 19:39 ` Indan Zupancic
2012-05-24 22:00 ` [kernel-hardening] " Andrew Morton
2012-05-24 22:00 ` Andrew Morton
2012-05-25 1:55 ` [kernel-hardening] " Will Drewry
2012-05-25 1:55 ` Will Drewry
2012-05-24 23:40 ` [kernel-hardening] " James Morris
2012-05-24 23:40 ` James Morris
2012-05-24 23:43 ` [kernel-hardening] " Andrew Lutomirski
2012-05-24 23:43 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2012-05-24 23:56 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-24 23:56 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-25 0:26 ` [kernel-hardening] " Andrew Lutomirski
2012-05-25 0:26 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2012-05-25 0:38 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-25 0:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-25 0:55 ` [kernel-hardening] " Andrew Lutomirski
2012-05-25 0:55 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2012-05-21 18:47 ` [kernel-hardening] Re: seccomp and ptrace. what is the correct order? richard -rw- weinberger
2012-05-21 18:47 ` richard -rw- weinberger
2012-05-21 19:13 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2012-05-21 19:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=4FBC0733.8030106@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=indan@nul.nu \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@mit.edu \
--cc=markus@chromium.org \
--cc=mcgrathr@google.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@parisplace.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pmoore@redhat.com \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=serge.hallyn@canonical.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=wad@chromium.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.