From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Chris Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.ma>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH for 4.18] rseq: use __u64 for rseq_cs fields, validate user inputs
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 22:30:09 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1776351430.10902.1530585009519.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxWMjwx-4TGBHt0H6bh6FXC3NKMsjp=eKGw5cgA4wMBUA@mail.gmail.com>
----- On Jul 2, 2018, at 10:18 PM, Linus Torvalds torvalds@linux-foundation.org wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 7:01 PM Mathieu Desnoyers
> <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
>>
>> One thing to consider is how we will implement the load of that pointer
>> on the kernel side.
>
> Use "get_user()". It works for 64-bit objects too, and it will be
> atomic in the 32-bit sub-parts on a 32-bit architecture.
Is it really ? Last time we had this discussion, not all architectures
guaranteed that reading a 64-bit integer would happen in two atomic
32-bit sub-parts. This was the main motivation for the LINUX_FIELD_u32_u64()
macro as it stands today (rather than using a union).
>
> Again: there is no point in trying to be atomic in the full 64 bits
> (when you're running on 32-bit). The upper bits don't have to "match"
> the lower bits. They just have to be zero. So doing it as two loads is
> fine - the same way it's perfectly fine to do it as two stores (since
> the store to the upper bits will always be zero).
I'd be fine with two atomic loads, but I'd rather have a strong
confirmation about this, because last time around there were
architectures where it was not true as far as I recall.
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> Linus
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-03 2:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-02 22:31 [RFC PATCH for 4.18] rseq: use __u64 for rseq_cs fields, validate user inputs Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 22:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-02 23:00 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-02 23:16 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-02 23:25 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:22 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-02 23:37 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-03 1:19 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 2:01 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 2:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03 2:30 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2018-07-03 2:33 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-03 2:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03 8:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 8:29 ` Heiko Carstens
2018-07-03 8:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 8:55 ` Heiko Carstens
2018-07-03 9:17 ` Heiko Carstens
2018-07-03 9:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 9:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 16:40 ` Andi Kleen
2018-07-03 17:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:06 ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-07-03 17:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03 17:26 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 17:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:38 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 17:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:58 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 18:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 18:15 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 18:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 18:41 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 19:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 17:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-03 18:09 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 18:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-07-03 0:19 ` Christopher Lameter
2018-07-03 0:23 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-07-03 0:35 ` Christopher Lameter
2018-07-03 1:17 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
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=1776351430.10902.1530585009519.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=bmaurer@fb.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=davejwatson@fb.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).