From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S965380AbbLRVMq (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:12:46 -0500
Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:1778 "EHLO mga02.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S965194AbbLRVMo (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:12:44 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,447,1444719600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="844300731"
Subject: Re: Rethinking sigcontext's xfeatures slightly for PKRU's benefit?
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
References: <CALCETrVw2V+Ny7=D=_E2m0Qa_v7Bp8GUjhyDXx_bWC35R2ohjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <56736BD1.5080700@linux.intel.com>
 <CALCETrWBjvTiVBPc098cGSH2vdezvdg-i6N4kZjgdcPT7uXoiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5673750B.606@linux.intel.com>
 <CALCETrWMofAX8TbZNyPaCWUHqcE85wpehDR05irEPtTYiVMXRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <FEA53E3B-6AE2-4305-82B1-C57451B6E33E@zytor.com>
 <CALCETrU28FoOwR+n8U0Qtt20=ZW6rgc3=M8X4G0QMt1_ZVHY7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <567453AF.5060808@linux.intel.com>
 <CALCETrU7TnbLSzOuGNmh=xDpa5W729RJSPdap2izXxagfg-biQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56746774.8000707@linux.intel.com>
 <CA+55aFycMWxCVY1p8n_D8nGz7Ky35uAmZMWm=zE5LBsqModiBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALCETrVWgFPTap_DNzP5vnrtyr7jjMwFHyRy=iY0amHrQ_euwg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFz9XdUP0BQXuq7UuZT1ke-+JVThs-bssMi2sV2xLubHVg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <567476CC.8080805@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 13:12:44 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFz9XdUP0BQXuq7UuZT1ke-+JVThs-bssMi2sV2xLubHVg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 12/18/2015 01:04 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>
>> IOW, I like my idea in which signal delivery always sets PKRU to the
>> application-requested-by-syscall values and sigreturn restores it.
> 
> So I don't mind that, as long as the whole "sigreturn restores it" is
> part of things.
> 
> Your original email with the suggestion to *not* resture PKRU I didn't
> like. Setting it and restoring it is fine.
> 
> I do wonder if you need an explicit value, though. I think it's
> reasonable to say that PKRU value 0 is special. It's what we'd start
> processes with, and why not just say that it's what we run signal
> handlers in?
> 
> Would any other value ever make sense, really?

Having a PKRU with the execute-only permissions set is the only one I
can think of.  For a system with a _dedicated_ PKEY for execute-only,
this is easy and could even be made a part of init_fpstate with no other
code changes.

But, if we are picking out an execute-only pkey more dynamically, we've
got to keep the default value for the entire process somewhere.