Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] arm64 relaxed ABI

From: Catalin Marinas <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 17:59:38 +0000

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 04:03:38PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 4:02 PM Catalin Marinas <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > The summary of our internal discussions (mostly between kernel
> > developers) is that we can't properly describe a user ABI that covers
> > future syscalls or syscall extensions while not all syscalls accept
> > tagged pointers. So we tweaked the requirements slightly to only allow
> > tagged pointers back into the kernel *if* the originating address is
> > from an anonymous mmap() or below sbrk(0). This should cover some of the
> > ioctls or getsockopt(TCP_ZEROCOPY_RECEIVE) where the user passes a
> > pointer to a buffer obtained via mmap() on the device operations.
> >
> > (sorry for not being clear on what Vincenzo's proposal implies)
> 
> OK, I see. So I need to make the following changes to my patchset AFAIU.
> 
> 1. Make sure that we only allow tagged user addresses that originate
> from an anonymous mmap() or below sbrk(0). How exactly should this
> check be performed?

I don't think we should perform such checks. That's rather stating that
the kernel only guarantees that the tagged pointers work if they
originated from these memory ranges.

> 2. Allow tagged addressed passed to memory syscalls (as long as (1) is
> satisfied). Do I understand correctly that this means that I need to
> locate all find_vma() callers outside of mm/ and fix them up as well?

Yes (unless anyone as a better idea or objections to this approach).

BTW, I'll be off until the new year, so won't be able to follow up.

-- 
Catalin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel