[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2aa64bf6-fead-08cc-f4fe-bd353008ca59@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 14:46:25 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ker.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
Marco Benatto <marco.antonio.780@...il.com>,
Juerg Haefliger <juerg.haefliger@...onical.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/11] mm, x86: Add support for eXclusive Page Frame
Ownership (XPFO)
On 11/13/2017 02:20 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 11/09/2017 05:09 PM, Tycho Andersen wrote:
>> which I guess is from the additional flags in grow_dev_page() somewhere down
>> the stack. Anyway... it seems this is a kernel allocation that's using
>> MIGRATE_MOVABLE, so perhaps we need some more fine tuned heuristic than just
>> all MOVABLE allocations are un-mapped via xpfo, and all the others are mapped.
>>
>> Do you have any ideas?
>
> It still has to do a kmap() or kmap_atomic() to be able to access it. I
> thought you hooked into that. Why isn't that path getting hit for these?
Oh, this looks to be accessing data mapped by a buffer_head. It
(rudely) accesses data via:
void set_bh_page(struct buffer_head *bh,
...
bh->b_data = page_address(page) + offset;
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.
