Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2021 15:33:02 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <>
To: Will Deacon <>, Kees Cook <>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <>, Mark Rutland <>, Elena Reshetova <>,, Andy Lutomirski <>, Peter Zijlstra <>, Alexander Potapenko <>, Alexander Popov <>, Ard Biesheuvel <>, Jann Horn <>, Vlastimil Babka <>, David Hildenbrand <>, Mike Rapoport <>, Andrew Morton <>, Jonathan Corbet <>, Randy Dunlap <>,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/6] Optionally randomize kernel stack offset each syscall

On Thu, Apr 01 2021 at 09:37, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 01:54:52PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Hi Will (and Mark and Catalin),
>> Can you take this via the arm64 tree for v5.13 please? Thomas has added
>> his Reviewed-by, so it only leaves arm64's. :)
> Sorry, these got mixed up in my inbox so I just replied to v7 and v8 and
> then noticed v9. Argh!
> However, I think the comments still apply: namely that the dummy "=m" looks
> dangerous to me


Hrmpf, didn't think about that.

> and I think you're accessing pcpu variables with preemption enabled
> for the arm64 part:

That's my fault. On x86 this is invoked right after coming up into C
code and _before_ enabling interrupts, which I why I suggested not to
use the wrapped one. raw_cpu_read() should be fine everywhere.



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.