From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E66EC433FF for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 09:00:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EAA2921773 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 09:00:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="k0EdyrRZ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EAA2921773 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=beu1BvUCGrbPeNyAs8INvv6QEcAt36xTmdnx4j1erHU=; b=k0EdyrRZH/zp1w /RELnEtTrvt+nGnz6on7B31NsIxSy+cNwujvTU51sNt7mXWMuJ6/Eb4EjBtSOumljk5mnPYH5ewVG jx4II14CIgwN52dGD6R2HGtsbLR8CJBFngJcAcFl2wGwH3edW9eUdmD1VYtMM1ui3ZU3ojZ8xk0Te PH4dCs/0mxziRkNhhp1FrhwHkmz0QwEJT8dl/qt7FBWFJvdhyLhtJ+wIKZFvZWeZMsfYmZ3aPQy49 WefxeamAwUNUyM1eIgiR+TOK1NYwalXKR2syr8yPCRPY4ViMs1l0+cQ4DF0U2ma0izI1DQhHot+ri DYU3HT46YLcD4bftl2MA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hw0lA-00082p-46; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 09:00:28 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hw0l7-00082H-RU for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 09 Aug 2019 09:00:27 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F595344; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 02:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arrakis.emea.arm.com (arrakis.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.78]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 796343F706; Fri, 9 Aug 2019 02:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:00:17 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Kees Cook Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 00/15] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel Message-ID: <20190809090016.GA23083@arrakis.emea.arm.com> References: <20190724140212.qzvbcx5j2gi5lcoj@willie-the-truck> <20190724142059.GC21234@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> <20190806171335.4dzjex5asoertaob@willie-the-truck> <201908081410.C16D2BD@keescook> <20190808153300.09d3eb80772515f0ea062833@linux-foundation.org> <201908081608.A4F6711@keescook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201908081608.A4F6711@keescook> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190809_020025_977922_9691D3C2 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 20.22 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Christian Koenig , Szabolcs Nagy , Will Deacon , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Kostya Serebryany , Khalid Aziz , Lee Smith , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Vincenzo Frascino , Will Deacon , Jacob Bramley , Leon Romanovsky , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Christoph Hellwig , Jason Gunthorpe , Dmitry Vyukov , Dave Martin , Evgeniy Stepanov , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Ruben Ayrapetyan , Andrey Konovalov , Kevin Brodsky , Alex Williamson , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linux ARM , Linux Memory Management List , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Felix Kuehling , Dave Hansen , LKML , Jens Wiklander , Ramana Radhakrishnan , Alexander Deucher , Andrew Morton , enh , Robin Murphy , Yishai Hadas , Luc Van Oostenryck Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org 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 and give your Acked-by or pick them up directly? > > > > > > Given the subsystem Acks, it seems like 3-10 and 12 could all just go > > > via Andrew? I hope he agrees. :) > > > > I'll grab everything that has not yet appeared in linux-next. If more > > of these patches appear in linux-next I'll drop those as well. > > > > The review discussion against " [PATCH v19 02/15] arm64: Introduce > > prctl() options to control the tagged user addresses ABI" has petered > > out inconclusively. prctl() vs arch_prctl(). > > I've always disliked arch_prctl() existing at all. Given that tagging is > likely to be a multi-architectural feature, it seems like the controls > should live in prctl() to me. It took a bit of grep'ing to figure out what Dave H meant by arch_prctl(). It's an x86-specific syscall which we do not have on arm64 (and possibly any other architecture). Actually, we don't have any arm64 specific syscalls, only the generic unistd.h, hence the confusion. For other arm64-specific prctls like SVE we used the generic sys_prctl() and I can see x86 not being consistent either (PR_MPX_ENABLE_MANAGEMENT). In general I disagree with adding any arm64-specific syscalls but in this instance it can't even be justified. I'd rather see some clean-up similar to arch_ptrace/ptrace_request than introducing new syscall numbers (but as I suggested in my reply to Dave, that's for another patch series). -- Catalin _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel