[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 16:07:37 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>,
Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 4/4] refcount: Report failures
through CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION
On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 01:50:20PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > Right something along those lines. (a) will need GCC help, and (b) would
> > be kernel-arch specific. So this isn't something we can quickly do.
>
> I agree this isn't something that can be hacked together quickly, and
> certainly shouldn't block these patches.
>
> However, I don't think we need anything new from GCC, and I think we
> already have a generic API for (b).
>
> For (a) we don't need new GCC help if we do something like we did in
> commit 72c5839515260dce to do the mangling. Prepend a prefix to the
> register, e.g. changing 'x0' to '__pt_regs_offset_x0', which we arrange
> to hold the correct value.
I'm not sure I can decipher that commit and therefore have no idea if
something similar can be done for other architectures.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
