From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751897AbdKICJD (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2017 21:09:03 -0500 Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:58365 "EHLO out4-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751241AbdKICJB (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2017 21:09:01 -0500 X-ME-Sender: Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 13:08:57 +1100 From: "Tobin C. Harding" To: Michael Ellerman Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, "Jason A. Donenfeld" , "Theodore Ts'o" , Linus Torvalds , Kees Cook , Paolo Bonzini , Tycho Andersen , "Roberts, William C" , Tejun Heo , Jordan Glover , Greg KH , Petr Mladek , Joe Perches , Ian Campbell , Sergey Senozhatsky , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Steven Rostedt , Chris Fries , Dave Weinstein , Daniel Micay , Djalal Harouni , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Network Development , David Miller Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH v4] scripts: add leaking_addresses.pl Message-ID: <20171109020857.GC19752@eros> References: <1510050731-32446-1-git-send-email-me@tobin.cc> <87k1z12cof.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> <20171108224832.GD27823@eros> <87y3ng1djj.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87y3ng1djj.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> X-Mailer: Mutt 1.5.24 (2015-08-30) User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 11:49:52AM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > "Tobin C. Harding" writes: > > > On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 11:10:56PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > >> "Tobin C. Harding" writes: > > [snip] > > > > Hi Michael, > > > > I'm working an adding support for ppc64 to leaking_addresses.pl, I've > > added the kernel address regular expression that you suggested. > > Thanks! > > > I'd like to add the false positive for vsyscall addresses. Excuse my > > ignorance but does PowerPC use a constant address range for vsyscall like x86_64 > > does? The ppc64 machine I have access to does not output anything for > > > > $ cat /proc/PID/tasks/PID/smaps or > > $ cat /proc/PID/tasks/PID/maps > > No we only have the vdso style vsyscall, which is mapped at user > addresses and is subject to ASLR, so you shouldn't need to worry about > it. Great. I'll add you to the CC list for the next spin. In line with my aim of having the most confusing patches to follow the next version will likely be [PATCH 0/X v2] scripts/leaking_addresses: add summary report thanks, Tobin.