From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752086AbcFWTRq (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jun 2016 15:17:46 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f66.google.com ([209.85.218.66]:34354 "EHLO mail-oi0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750890AbcFWTRn (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jun 2016 15:17:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160623185340.GO30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20160623143126.GA16664@redhat.com> <20160623170352.GA17372@redhat.com> <20160623185340.GO30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:17:41 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: eVicT8WyoAc8sWscFwhCXLQnAUs Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Virtually mapped stacks with guard pages (x86, core) To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Oleg Nesterov , Andy Lutomirski , Andy Lutomirski , "the arch/x86 maintainers" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Borislav Petkov , Nadav Amit , Kees Cook , Brian Gerst , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , Josh Poimboeuf , Jann Horn , Heiko Carstens Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> >> So the attached patch seems to be the right thing to do regardless of >> this whole discussion. > > Yeah, that looks fine. Want me to take it or will you just commit? I'm committing these trivial non-semantic patches, I'm actually running the kernel without any ti->task pointer now (the previous patch I sent out). So I'll do the mutex debug patch and the stack dump patch as just he obvious cleanup patches. Those are the "purely legacy reasons for a bad calling convention", and I'm ok with those during the rc series to make it easier for people to play around with this. With he goal being that I'm hoping that we can then actually get rid of this (at least on x86-64, even if we leave it in some other architectures) in 4.8. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Virtually mapped stacks with guard pages (x86, core) Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:17:41 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20160623143126.GA16664@redhat.com> <20160623170352.GA17372@redhat.com> <20160623185340.GO30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-oi0-f66.google.com ([209.85.218.66]:34354 "EHLO mail-oi0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750890AbcFWTRn (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jun 2016 15:17:43 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160623185340.GO30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Oleg Nesterov , Andy Lutomirski , Andy Lutomirski , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Borislav Petkov , Nadav Amit , Kees Cook , Brian Gerst , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , Josh Poimboeuf , Jann Horn , Heiko Carstens On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> >> So the attached patch seems to be the right thing to do regardless of >> this whole discussion. > > Yeah, that looks fine. Want me to take it or will you just commit? I'm committing these trivial non-semantic patches, I'm actually running the kernel without any ti->task pointer now (the previous patch I sent out). So I'll do the mutex debug patch and the stack dump patch as just he obvious cleanup patches. Those are the "purely legacy reasons for a bad calling convention", and I'm ok with those during the rc series to make it easier for people to play around with this. With he goal being that I'm hoping that we can then actually get rid of this (at least on x86-64, even if we leave it in some other architectures) in 4.8. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Reply-To: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linus971@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <20160623185340.GO30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20160623143126.GA16664@redhat.com> <20160623170352.GA17372@redhat.com> <20160623185340.GO30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:17:41 -0700 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Virtually mapped stacks with guard pages (x86, core) To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Oleg Nesterov , Andy Lutomirski , Andy Lutomirski , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Borislav Petkov , Nadav Amit , Kees Cook , Brian Gerst , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , Josh Poimboeuf , Jann Horn , Heiko Carstens List-ID: On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> >> So the attached patch seems to be the right thing to do regardless of >> this whole discussion. > > Yeah, that looks fine. Want me to take it or will you just commit? I'm committing these trivial non-semantic patches, I'm actually running the kernel without any ti->task pointer now (the previous patch I sent out). So I'll do the mutex debug patch and the stack dump patch as just he obvious cleanup patches. Those are the "purely legacy reasons for a bad calling convention", and I'm ok with those during the rc series to make it easier for people to play around with this. With he goal being that I'm hoping that we can then actually get rid of this (at least on x86-64, even if we leave it in some other architectures) in 4.8. Linus