From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Reply-To: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com From: "Reshetova, Elena" Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 09:06:10 +0000 Message-ID: <2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612B41BFF6CB@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1478809488-18303-1-git-send-email-elena.reshetova@intel.com> <1478809488-18303-2-git-send-email-elena.reshetova@intel.com> <20161110213535.GA3117@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> In-Reply-To: <20161110213535.GA3117@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [kernel-hardening] Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 01/13] Add architecture independent hardened atomic base To: "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" Cc: "keescook@chromium.org" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "Anvin, H Peter" , "will.deacon@arm.com" , Hans Liljestrand , David Windsor List-ID: On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:24:36PM +0200, Elena Reshetova wrote: > include/asm-generic/local.h | 3 + > include/asm-generic/local_wrap.h | 63 +++++++++++ >Seriously? Is there a single instance of local_t where any of this matters= ? Oh, I would be the first person to vote for dropping the local_t changes ou= t of this patchset!=20 (we actually proposed this in past). Reason why we had to deal with it is t= hat couple of places=20 (like kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c ) utilizes local_t extensively for stuff w= e want to allow to overflow, like indexing and etc. So, if we want to opt-out of protection for that ty= pes and preserve the overall logic of the changes, we need to add the local_*_wrap() functions. = But local changes=20 is such a pain and used so little, that would be great to solve it in other= way than this. Just so far noone suggested a better way.=20