All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>
To: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
	Evgeniy Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
	Lee Smith <Lee.Smith@arm.com>,
	Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
	Jacob Bramley <Jacob.Bramley@arm.com>,
	Ruben Ayrapetyan <Ruben.Ayrapetyan@arm.com>,
	Chintan Pandya <cpandya@codeaurora.org>,
	Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>,
	Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 13/14] arm64: update Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:26:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <81bc3110-b638-4545-1270-26baec3d59e7@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bf0abceeaf32e6b9cdbc9dde45cc5966b5747ec4.1552679409.git.andreyknvl@google.com>

On 15/03/2019 19:51, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> Document the ABI changes in Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
> ---
>   Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt | 18 ++++++++----------
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> index a25a99e82bb1..07fdddeacad0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> @@ -17,13 +17,15 @@ this byte for application use.
>   Passing tagged addresses to the kernel
>   --------------------------------------
>   
> -All interpretation of userspace memory addresses by the kernel assumes
> -an address tag of 0x00.
> +The kernel supports tags in pointer arguments (including pointers in
> +structures) of syscalls, however such pointers must point to memory ranges
> +obtained by anonymous mmap() or brk().
>   
> -This includes, but is not limited to, addresses found in:
> +The kernel supports tags in user fault addresses. However the fault_address
> +field in the sigcontext struct will contain an untagged address.
>   
> - - pointer arguments to system calls, including pointers in structures
> -   passed to system calls,
> +All other interpretations of userspace memory addresses by the kernel
> +assume an address tag of 0x00, in particular:
>   
>    - the stack pointer (sp), e.g. when interpreting it to deliver a
>      signal,
> @@ -33,11 +35,7 @@ This includes, but is not limited to, addresses found in:
>   
>   Using non-zero address tags in any of these locations may result in an
>   error code being returned, a (fatal) signal being raised, or other modes
> -of failure.
> -
> -For these reasons, passing non-zero address tags to the kernel via
> -system calls is forbidden, and using a non-zero address tag for sp is
> -strongly discouraged.
> +of failure. Using a non-zero address tag for sp is strongly discouraged.

I don't understand why we should keep such a limitation. For MTE, tagging SP is 
something we are definitely considering. This does bother userspace software in some 
rare cases, but I'm not sure in what way it bothers the kernel.

Kevin

>   
>   Programs maintaining a frame pointer and frame records that use non-zero
>   address tags may suffer impaired or inaccurate debug and profiling


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: kevin.brodsky at arm.com (Kevin Brodsky)
Subject: [PATCH v11 13/14] arm64: update Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:26:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <81bc3110-b638-4545-1270-26baec3d59e7@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bf0abceeaf32e6b9cdbc9dde45cc5966b5747ec4.1552679409.git.andreyknvl@google.com>

On 15/03/2019 19:51, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> Document the ABI changes in Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl at google.com>
> ---
>   Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt | 18 ++++++++----------
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> index a25a99e82bb1..07fdddeacad0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> @@ -17,13 +17,15 @@ this byte for application use.
>   Passing tagged addresses to the kernel
>   --------------------------------------
>   
> -All interpretation of userspace memory addresses by the kernel assumes
> -an address tag of 0x00.
> +The kernel supports tags in pointer arguments (including pointers in
> +structures) of syscalls, however such pointers must point to memory ranges
> +obtained by anonymous mmap() or brk().
>   
> -This includes, but is not limited to, addresses found in:
> +The kernel supports tags in user fault addresses. However the fault_address
> +field in the sigcontext struct will contain an untagged address.
>   
> - - pointer arguments to system calls, including pointers in structures
> -   passed to system calls,
> +All other interpretations of userspace memory addresses by the kernel
> +assume an address tag of 0x00, in particular:
>   
>    - the stack pointer (sp), e.g. when interpreting it to deliver a
>      signal,
> @@ -33,11 +35,7 @@ This includes, but is not limited to, addresses found in:
>   
>   Using non-zero address tags in any of these locations may result in an
>   error code being returned, a (fatal) signal being raised, or other modes
> -of failure.
> -
> -For these reasons, passing non-zero address tags to the kernel via
> -system calls is forbidden, and using a non-zero address tag for sp is
> -strongly discouraged.
> +of failure. Using a non-zero address tag for sp is strongly discouraged.

I don't understand why we should keep such a limitation. For MTE, tagging SP is 
something we are definitely considering. This does bother userspace software in some 
rare cases, but I'm not sure in what way it bothers the kernel.

Kevin

>   
>   Programs maintaining a frame pointer and frame records that use non-zero
>   address tags may suffer impaired or inaccurate debug and profiling

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: kevin.brodsky@arm.com (Kevin Brodsky)
Subject: [PATCH v11 13/14] arm64: update Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:26:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <81bc3110-b638-4545-1270-26baec3d59e7@arm.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190318132648.AATrmZZzQrbNAWYflRM1OQjw8M36GrwBYNYjDkNBo9E@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bf0abceeaf32e6b9cdbc9dde45cc5966b5747ec4.1552679409.git.andreyknvl@google.com>

On 15/03/2019 19:51, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> Document the ABI changes in Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl at google.com>
> ---
>   Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt | 18 ++++++++----------
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> index a25a99e82bb1..07fdddeacad0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> @@ -17,13 +17,15 @@ this byte for application use.
>   Passing tagged addresses to the kernel
>   --------------------------------------
>   
> -All interpretation of userspace memory addresses by the kernel assumes
> -an address tag of 0x00.
> +The kernel supports tags in pointer arguments (including pointers in
> +structures) of syscalls, however such pointers must point to memory ranges
> +obtained by anonymous mmap() or brk().
>   
> -This includes, but is not limited to, addresses found in:
> +The kernel supports tags in user fault addresses. However the fault_address
> +field in the sigcontext struct will contain an untagged address.
>   
> - - pointer arguments to system calls, including pointers in structures
> -   passed to system calls,
> +All other interpretations of userspace memory addresses by the kernel
> +assume an address tag of 0x00, in particular:
>   
>    - the stack pointer (sp), e.g. when interpreting it to deliver a
>      signal,
> @@ -33,11 +35,7 @@ This includes, but is not limited to, addresses found in:
>   
>   Using non-zero address tags in any of these locations may result in an
>   error code being returned, a (fatal) signal being raised, or other modes
> -of failure.
> -
> -For these reasons, passing non-zero address tags to the kernel via
> -system calls is forbidden, and using a non-zero address tag for sp is
> -strongly discouraged.
> +of failure. Using a non-zero address tag for sp is strongly discouraged.

I don't understand why we should keep such a limitation. For MTE, tagging SP is 
something we are definitely considering. This does bother userspace software in some 
rare cases, but I'm not sure in what way it bothers the kernel.

Kevin

>   
>   Programs maintaining a frame pointer and frame records that use non-zero
>   address tags may suffer impaired or inaccurate debug and profiling

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>
To: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Chintan Pandya <cpandya@codeaurora.org>,
	Jacob Bramley <Jacob.Bramley@arm.com>,
	Ruben Ayrapetyan <Ruben.Ayrapetyan@arm.com>,
	Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com>,
	Lee Smith <Lee.Smith@arm.com>, Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
	Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>,
	Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	Evgeniy Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 13/14] arm64: update Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:26:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <81bc3110-b638-4545-1270-26baec3d59e7@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bf0abceeaf32e6b9cdbc9dde45cc5966b5747ec4.1552679409.git.andreyknvl@google.com>

On 15/03/2019 19:51, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> This patch is a part of a series that extends arm64 kernel ABI to allow to
> pass tagged user pointers (with the top byte set to something else other
> than 0x00) as syscall arguments.
>
> Document the ABI changes in Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
> ---
>   Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt | 18 ++++++++----------
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> index a25a99e82bb1..07fdddeacad0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt
> @@ -17,13 +17,15 @@ this byte for application use.
>   Passing tagged addresses to the kernel
>   --------------------------------------
>   
> -All interpretation of userspace memory addresses by the kernel assumes
> -an address tag of 0x00.
> +The kernel supports tags in pointer arguments (including pointers in
> +structures) of syscalls, however such pointers must point to memory ranges
> +obtained by anonymous mmap() or brk().
>   
> -This includes, but is not limited to, addresses found in:
> +The kernel supports tags in user fault addresses. However the fault_address
> +field in the sigcontext struct will contain an untagged address.
>   
> - - pointer arguments to system calls, including pointers in structures
> -   passed to system calls,
> +All other interpretations of userspace memory addresses by the kernel
> +assume an address tag of 0x00, in particular:
>   
>    - the stack pointer (sp), e.g. when interpreting it to deliver a
>      signal,
> @@ -33,11 +35,7 @@ This includes, but is not limited to, addresses found in:
>   
>   Using non-zero address tags in any of these locations may result in an
>   error code being returned, a (fatal) signal being raised, or other modes
> -of failure.
> -
> -For these reasons, passing non-zero address tags to the kernel via
> -system calls is forbidden, and using a non-zero address tag for sp is
> -strongly discouraged.
> +of failure. Using a non-zero address tag for sp is strongly discouraged.

I don't understand why we should keep such a limitation. For MTE, tagging SP is 
something we are definitely considering. This does bother userspace software in some 
rare cases, but I'm not sure in what way it bothers the kernel.

Kevin

>   
>   Programs maintaining a frame pointer and frame records that use non-zero
>   address tags may suffer impaired or inaccurate debug and profiling


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-03-18 13:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 224+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-15 19:51 [PATCH v11 00/14] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 01/14] uaccess: add untagged_addr definition for other arches Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 02/14] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and __uaccess_mask_ptr Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 03/14] lib, arm64: untag user pointers in strn*_user Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-18 11:33   ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-18 11:33     ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-18 11:33     ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-18 11:33     ` kevin.brodsky
2019-03-18 11:33   ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 04/14] mm, arm64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 05/14] mm, arm64: untag user pointers in mm/gup.c Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 06/14] fs, arm64: untag user pointers in copy_mount_options Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 07/14] fs, arm64: untag user pointers in fs/userfaultfd.c Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 08/14] net, arm64: untag user pointers in tcp_zerocopy_receive Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 20:03   ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-15 20:03     ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-15 20:03     ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-15 20:03     ` eric.dumazet
2019-03-18 13:14     ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:14       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:14       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:14       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:14       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:14       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:14       ` andreyknvl
2019-03-18 13:16       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:16         ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:16         ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:16         ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:16         ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:16         ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:16         ` andreyknvl
2019-03-18 14:44         ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-18 14:44           ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-18 14:44           ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-18 14:44           ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-18 14:44           ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-18 14:44           ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-18 14:44           ` edumazet
2019-03-18 16:08           ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:08             ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:08             ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:08             ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:08             ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:08             ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:08             ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 20:03   ` Eric Dumazet
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 09/14] kernel, arm64: untag user pointers in prctl_set_mm* Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-16 19:31   ` kbuild test robot
2019-03-16 19:31     ` kbuild test robot
2019-03-16 19:31     ` kbuild test robot
2019-03-18 16:53     ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` andreyknvl
2019-03-18 11:47   ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-18 11:47     ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-18 11:47     ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-18 11:47     ` kevin.brodsky
2019-03-18 16:53     ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:53       ` andreyknvl
2019-03-18 11:47   ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 10/14] tracing, arm64: untag user pointers in seq_print_user_ip Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 20:14   ` Steven Rostedt
2019-03-15 20:14     ` Steven Rostedt
2019-03-15 20:14     ` Steven Rostedt
2019-03-15 20:14     ` Steven Rostedt
2019-03-15 20:14     ` rostedt
2019-03-18 13:11     ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:11       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:11       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:11       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:11       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:11       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 13:11       ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 11/14] uprobes, arm64: untag user pointers in find_active_uprobe Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 12/14] bpf, arm64: untag user pointers in stack_map_get_build_id_offset Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 13/14] arm64: update Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-18 13:26   ` Kevin Brodsky [this message]
2019-03-18 13:26     ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-18 13:26     ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-18 13:26     ` kevin.brodsky
2019-03-18 16:59     ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:59       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:59       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:59       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:59       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:59       ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-18 16:59       ` andreyknvl
2019-03-18 13:26   ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` [PATCH v11 14/14] selftests, arm64: add a selftest for passing tagged pointers to kernel Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51 ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` Andrey Konovalov
2019-03-15 19:51   ` andreyknvl
2019-03-18 16:35 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64 relaxed ABI Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35   ` vincenzo.frascino
2019-03-18 16:35   ` [PATCH v2 1/4] elf: Make AT_FLAGS arch configurable Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` vincenzo.frascino
2019-03-18 16:35   ` [PATCH v2 2/4] arm64: Define Documentation/arm64/elf_at_flags.txt Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` vincenzo.frascino
2019-03-22  6:22     ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-03-22  6:22       ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-03-22  6:22       ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-03-22  6:22       ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-03-22  6:22       ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-03-22  6:22       ` amit.kachhap
2019-03-22 10:48       ` Catalin Marinas
2019-03-22 10:48         ` Catalin Marinas
2019-03-22 10:48         ` Catalin Marinas
2019-03-22 10:48         ` Catalin Marinas
2019-03-22 10:48         ` catalin.marinas
2019-03-22 15:52     ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-22 15:52       ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-22 15:52       ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-22 15:52       ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-03-22 15:52       ` kevin.brodsky
2019-04-03 16:50       ` Catalin Marinas
2019-04-03 16:50         ` Catalin Marinas
2019-04-03 16:50         ` Catalin Marinas
2019-04-03 16:50         ` Catalin Marinas
2019-04-03 16:50         ` catalin.marinas
2019-04-12 14:16         ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-04-12 14:16           ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-04-12 14:16           ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-04-12 14:16           ` Kevin Brodsky
2019-04-12 14:16           ` kevin.brodsky
2019-03-18 16:35   ` [PATCH v2 3/4] arm64: Relax Documentation/arm64/tagged-pointers.txt Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` vincenzo.frascino
2019-03-18 16:35   ` [PATCH v2 4/4] arm64: elf: Advertise relaxed ABI Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-03-18 16:35     ` vincenzo.frascino

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=81bc3110-b638-4545-1270-26baec3d59e7@arm.com \
    --to=kevin.brodsky@arm.com \
    --cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
    --cc=Jacob.Bramley@arm.com \
    --cc=Lee.Smith@arm.com \
    --cc=Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com \
    --cc=Ruben.Ayrapetyan@arm.com \
    --cc=Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andreyknvl@google.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=cpandya@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=eugenis@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=kcc@google.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.