From: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/8] x86, mpx: Support 32-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2014 07:50:53 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <548C605D.2040106@sr71.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrXt4yi6GC1f-gRYRYHuOue0-RfCWhQqJL0XK0hdUurDxA@mail.gmail.com>
On 12/12/2014 05:45 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I was thinking of this:
>
> + if (is_64bit_mm(mm)) {
> + vaddr_space_size = 1ULL << __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT;
> + bd_entry_virt_space = vaddr_space_size / MPX_BD_NR_ENTRIES_64;
> + /*
> + * __VIRTUAL_MASK takes the 64-bit addressing hole
> + * in to accout. This is a noop on 32-bit.
> + */
> + addr &= __VIRTUAL_MASK;
> + return addr / bd_entry_virt_space;
> + } else {
> + vaddr_space_size = (1ULL << 32);
> + bd_entry_virt_space = vaddr_space_size / MPX_BD_NR_ENTRIES_32;
> + return addr / bd_entry_virt_space;
> + }
>
> Is there a scenario in which the return value ends up being insanely
> high? If so, does it matter?
Yes, it will be insanely high for a 32-bit process. The kernel could go
looking for the bounds directory entry at some bonkers virtual address
that makes no sense on 32-bit.
But, that bonkers address is still treated as coming from userspace.
The kernel will go and dereference it via a get_user(), fault, notice
the bad address and kill the process.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-13 15:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-12 19:12 [RFC][PATCH 0/8] x86, mpx: Support 32-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 19:12 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/8] x86: make is_64bit_mm() widely available Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 19:12 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/8] x86: make __VIRTUAL_MASK safe to use on 32 bit Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 19:12 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/8] x86, mpx: we do not allocate the bounds directory Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 19:12 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/8] x86, mpx: remove redundant MPX_BNDCFG_ADDR_MASK Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 19:12 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/8] x86, mpx: Add temporary variable to reduce masking Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 19:12 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/8] x86, mpx: new directory entry to addr helper Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 19:12 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/8] x86, mpx: do 32-bit-only cmpxchg for 32-bit apps Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 19:12 ` [RFC][PATCH 8/8] x86, mpx: support 32bit binaries on 64bit kernel Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 20:22 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/8] x86, mpx: Support 32-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-12 20:27 ` Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 20:48 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-12 21:41 ` Dave Hansen
2014-12-12 23:04 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-12 23:16 ` Dave Hansen
2014-12-13 0:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-13 0:23 ` Dave Hansen
2014-12-13 1:45 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-13 15:50 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2014-12-12 20:27 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-12-12 20:35 ` Dave Hansen
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=548C605D.2040106@sr71.net \
--to=dave@sr71.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox