Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 13:25:20 -0700 From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> To: Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com> Cc: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Clear the stack On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com> wrote: > On 06/29/2018 01:19 PM, Kees Cook wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com> wrote: >>> >>> Implementation of stackleak based heavily on the x86 version >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com> >>> [...] >>> +#define current_top_of_stack() (task_stack_page(current) + THREAD_SIZE) >>> +#define on_thread_stack() (on_task_stack(current, >>> current_stack_pointer)) >> >> >> nit on types here. I get some warnings: >> >> kernel/stackleak.c:55:12: warning: assignment makes integer from >> pointer without a cast [-Wint-conversion] >> boundary = current_top_of_stack(); >> ^ >> kernel/stackleak.c:65:24: warning: assignment makes integer from >> pointer without a cast [-Wint-conversion] >> current->lowest_stack = current_top_of_stack() - THREAD_SIZE / 64; >> ^ >> >> So I think this needs to be: >> >> +#define current_top_of_stack() ((unsigned long)task_stack_page(current) + >> \ >> + THREAD_SIZE) >> > > Argh, missed that in an amend, can fix for next version if there > are no other objections to this approach. No worries! I've made the change locally and will push this out to -next unless there are objections? -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security
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.