From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Cc: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/5] KVM: arm/arm64: context-switch ptrauth registers
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 14:40:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190424134023.GV3567@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <09bd4e79-c507-1f00-01c5-38afb2a62077@arm.com>
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:29:37AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 23/04/2019 16:44, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 03:54:32PM +0530, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
> >> Hi Mark,
> >>
> >> On 4/23/19 3:09 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 05:42:35 +0100,
> >>> Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@arm.com> wrote:
[...]
> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> >>>> index 7e34b9e..3cfe2eb 100644
> >>>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> >>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> >>>> @@ -1301,8 +1301,9 @@ config ARM64_PTR_AUTH
> >>>> context-switched along with the process.
> >>>> The feature is detected at runtime. If the feature is not present in
> >>>> - hardware it will not be advertised to userspace nor will it be
> >>>> - enabled.
> >>>> + hardware it will not be advertised to userspace/KVM guest nor will it
> >>>> + be enabled. However, KVM guest also require VHE mode and hence
> >>>> + CONFIG_ARM64_VHE=y option to use this feature.
> >>>
> >>> SVE seems to have the exact same requirements, and has
> >>>
> >>> depends on !KVM || ARM64_VHE
> >>>
> >>> Why don't we have that for PTR_AUTH too?
> >> This point came up earlier also and it was suggested by Dave[1] to leave
> >> userspace ptrauth for non-vhe mode as that would bring regression now.
> >> [1]:https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/3/27/583
> >
> > I see Marc applied this change in
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git/commit/?h=queue&id=e19b245fa4c61558536bd34f80845f0c41eab65f0
>
> That's only for me not to forget anything, and it hasn't been folded
> into the original patch yet.
Ah, right, misunderstood.
> > The risk here is that someone has a custom config from an old kernel
> > that explicitly turns CONFIG_ARM64_VHE off, and that try to use that
> > config with this patch.
> >
> > I'm not sure how much we care about that.
> >
> > Otherwise, blocking this config so that people don't accidentally rely
> > on it seems sensible.
>
> What I'm trying to do is to reduce the amount of valid kernel
> configurations that we need to validate independently.
>
> At this stage, I'm tempted to just restrict it as described above, and
> maybe relax it if someone shouts at me.
Sounds good to me.
Cheers
---Dave
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/5] KVM: arm/arm64: context-switch ptrauth registers
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 14:40:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190424134023.GV3567@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190424134023.SQTXP7g474TRvdkoyKhELV_YwytT3Gy8q6ma7xkJhx4@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <09bd4e79-c507-1f00-01c5-38afb2a62077@arm.com>
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:29:37AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 23/04/2019 16:44, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 03:54:32PM +0530, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
> >> Hi Mark,
> >>
> >> On 4/23/19 3:09 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 05:42:35 +0100,
> >>> Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@arm.com> wrote:
[...]
> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> >>>> index 7e34b9e..3cfe2eb 100644
> >>>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> >>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> >>>> @@ -1301,8 +1301,9 @@ config ARM64_PTR_AUTH
> >>>> context-switched along with the process.
> >>>> The feature is detected at runtime. If the feature is not present in
> >>>> - hardware it will not be advertised to userspace nor will it be
> >>>> - enabled.
> >>>> + hardware it will not be advertised to userspace/KVM guest nor will it
> >>>> + be enabled. However, KVM guest also require VHE mode and hence
> >>>> + CONFIG_ARM64_VHE=y option to use this feature.
> >>>
> >>> SVE seems to have the exact same requirements, and has
> >>>
> >>> depends on !KVM || ARM64_VHE
> >>>
> >>> Why don't we have that for PTR_AUTH too?
> >> This point came up earlier also and it was suggested by Dave[1] to leave
> >> userspace ptrauth for non-vhe mode as that would bring regression now.
> >> [1]:https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/3/27/583
> >
> > I see Marc applied this change in
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git/commit/?h=queue&id=e19b245fa4c61558536bd34f80845f0c41eab65f0
>
> That's only for me not to forget anything, and it hasn't been folded
> into the original patch yet.
Ah, right, misunderstood.
> > The risk here is that someone has a custom config from an old kernel
> > that explicitly turns CONFIG_ARM64_VHE off, and that try to use that
> > config with this patch.
> >
> > I'm not sure how much we care about that.
> >
> > Otherwise, blocking this config so that people don't accidentally rely
> > on it seems sensible.
>
> What I'm trying to do is to reduce the amount of valid kernel
> configurations that we need to validate independently.
>
> At this stage, I'm tempted to just restrict it as described above, and
> maybe relax it if someone shouts at me.
Sounds good to me.
Cheers
---Dave
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/5] KVM: arm/arm64: context-switch ptrauth registers
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 14:40:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190424134023.GV3567@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <09bd4e79-c507-1f00-01c5-38afb2a62077@arm.com>
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:29:37AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 23/04/2019 16:44, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 03:54:32PM +0530, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
> >> Hi Mark,
> >>
> >> On 4/23/19 3:09 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 05:42:35 +0100,
> >>> Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@arm.com> wrote:
[...]
> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> >>>> index 7e34b9e..3cfe2eb 100644
> >>>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> >>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> >>>> @@ -1301,8 +1301,9 @@ config ARM64_PTR_AUTH
> >>>> context-switched along with the process.
> >>>> The feature is detected at runtime. If the feature is not present in
> >>>> - hardware it will not be advertised to userspace nor will it be
> >>>> - enabled.
> >>>> + hardware it will not be advertised to userspace/KVM guest nor will it
> >>>> + be enabled. However, KVM guest also require VHE mode and hence
> >>>> + CONFIG_ARM64_VHE=y option to use this feature.
> >>>
> >>> SVE seems to have the exact same requirements, and has
> >>>
> >>> depends on !KVM || ARM64_VHE
> >>>
> >>> Why don't we have that for PTR_AUTH too?
> >> This point came up earlier also and it was suggested by Dave[1] to leave
> >> userspace ptrauth for non-vhe mode as that would bring regression now.
> >> [1]:https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/3/27/583
> >
> > I see Marc applied this change in
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvmarm/kvmarm.git/commit/?h=queue&id=e19b245fa4c61558536bd34f80845f0c41eab65f0
>
> That's only for me not to forget anything, and it hasn't been folded
> into the original patch yet.
Ah, right, misunderstood.
> > The risk here is that someone has a custom config from an old kernel
> > that explicitly turns CONFIG_ARM64_VHE off, and that try to use that
> > config with this patch.
> >
> > I'm not sure how much we care about that.
> >
> > Otherwise, blocking this config so that people don't accidentally rely
> > on it seems sensible.
>
> What I'm trying to do is to reduce the amount of valid kernel
> configurations that we need to validate independently.
>
> At this stage, I'm tempted to just restrict it as described above, and
> maybe relax it if someone shouts at me.
Sounds good to me.
Cheers
---Dave
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-24 13:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-23 4:42 [PATCH v10 0/5] Add ARMv8.3 pointer authentication for kvm guest Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` [PATCH v10 1/5] KVM: arm64: Add a vcpu flag to control ptrauth for guest Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 15:44 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:44 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:44 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 5:57 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-24 5:57 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-24 5:57 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-24 13:42 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 13:42 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 13:42 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 4:42 ` [PATCH v10 2/5] KVM: arm/arm64: context-switch ptrauth registers Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 9:39 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-23 9:39 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-23 9:39 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-23 9:39 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-23 10:24 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 10:24 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 10:24 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 15:44 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:44 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:44 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 10:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-24 10:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-24 10:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-24 13:40 ` Dave Martin [this message]
2019-04-24 13:40 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 13:40 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 13:39 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 13:39 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 13:39 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 13:39 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 14:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-24 14:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-24 14:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-24 14:30 ` Dave P Martin
2019-04-24 14:30 ` Dave P Martin
2019-04-24 14:30 ` Dave P Martin
2019-04-24 14:30 ` Dave P Martin
2019-04-23 4:42 ` [PATCH v10 3/5] KVM: arm64: Add userspace flag to enable pointer authentication Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 15:45 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:45 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:45 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 6:39 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-24 6:39 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-24 6:39 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` [PATCH v10 4/5] KVM: arm64: Add capability to advertise ptrauth for guest Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 15:45 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:45 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:45 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 4:42 ` [kvmtool PATCH v10 5/5] KVM: arm/arm64: Add a vcpu feature for pointer authentication Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 4:42 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-23 15:46 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:46 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-23 15:46 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 7:02 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-24 7:02 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-24 7:02 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-04-24 13:41 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 13:41 ` Dave Martin
2019-04-24 13:41 ` Dave Martin
2019-05-28 10:11 ` Dave Martin
2019-05-28 10:11 ` Dave Martin
2019-05-28 10:11 ` Dave Martin
2019-05-28 12:48 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-05-28 12:48 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-05-28 12:48 ` Amit Daniel Kachhap
2019-05-28 13:38 ` Dave Martin
2019-05-28 13:38 ` Dave Martin
2019-05-28 13:38 ` Dave Martin
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=20190424134023.GV3567@e103592.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=dave.martin@arm.com \
--cc=amit.kachhap@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=kristina.martsenko@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=ramana.radhakrishnan@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.