From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jeremy.linton@arm.com,
hjl.tools@gmail.com, libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
szabolcs.nagy@arm.com, yu-cheng.yu@intel.com,
ebiederm@xmission.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 0/2] arm64: Enable BTI for the executable as well as the interpreter
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:57:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yl/1KertC3/UtwR4@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yl/ZCvPB2Qx98+OG@arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1459 bytes --]
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:57:30AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:36:13AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Kees, please can you drop this series while Catalin's alternative solution
> > is under discussion (his Reviewed-by preceded the other patches)?
> > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220413134946.2732468-1-catalin.marinas@arm.com
> > Both series expose new behaviours to userspace and we don't need both.
> I agree. Even though the patches have my reviewed-by, I think we should
> postpone them until we figure out a better W^X solution that does not
> affect BTI (and if we can't, we revisit these patches).
Indeed. I had been expecting this to follow the pattern of the previous
nine months or so and be mostly ignored for the time being while
Catalin's new series goes forward. Now that it's applied it might be
worth keeping the first patch still in case someone else needs it but
the second patch can probably wait.
> Arguably, the two approaches are complementary but the way this series
> turned out is for the BTI on main executable to be default off. I have a
> worry that the feature won't get used, so we just carry unnecessary code
> in the kernel. Jeremy also found this approach less than ideal:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/59fc8a58-5013-606b-f544-8277cda18e50@arm.com
I'm not sure there was a fundamental concern with the approach there but
rather some pushback on the instance on turning it off by default.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jeremy.linton@arm.com,
hjl.tools@gmail.com, libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
szabolcs.nagy@arm.com, yu-cheng.yu@intel.com,
ebiederm@xmission.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 0/2] arm64: Enable BTI for the executable as well as the interpreter
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:57:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yl/1KertC3/UtwR4@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yl/ZCvPB2Qx98+OG@arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1459 bytes --]
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:57:30AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:36:13AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Kees, please can you drop this series while Catalin's alternative solution
> > is under discussion (his Reviewed-by preceded the other patches)?
> > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220413134946.2732468-1-catalin.marinas@arm.com
> > Both series expose new behaviours to userspace and we don't need both.
> I agree. Even though the patches have my reviewed-by, I think we should
> postpone them until we figure out a better W^X solution that does not
> affect BTI (and if we can't, we revisit these patches).
Indeed. I had been expecting this to follow the pattern of the previous
nine months or so and be mostly ignored for the time being while
Catalin's new series goes forward. Now that it's applied it might be
worth keeping the first patch still in case someone else needs it but
the second patch can probably wait.
> Arguably, the two approaches are complementary but the way this series
> turned out is for the BTI on main executable to be default off. I have a
> worry that the feature won't get used, so we just carry unnecessary code
> in the kernel. Jeremy also found this approach less than ideal:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/59fc8a58-5013-606b-f544-8277cda18e50@arm.com
I'm not sure there was a fundamental concern with the approach there but
rather some pushback on the instance on turning it off by default.
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
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:[~2022-04-20 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-19 10:51 [PATCH v13 0/2] arm64: Enable BTI for the executable as well as the interpreter Mark Brown
2022-04-19 10:51 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-19 10:51 ` [PATCH v13 1/2] elf: Allow architectures to parse properties on the main executable Mark Brown
2022-04-19 10:51 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-20 16:51 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-20 16:51 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-19 10:51 ` [PATCH v13 2/2] arm64: Enable BTI for main executable as well as the interpreter Mark Brown
2022-04-19 10:51 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-20 5:33 ` [PATCH v13 0/2] arm64: Enable BTI for the " Kees Cook
2022-04-20 5:33 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-20 9:36 ` Will Deacon
2022-04-20 9:36 ` Will Deacon
2022-04-20 9:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-04-20 9:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-04-20 11:57 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2022-04-20 11:57 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-20 13:39 ` Jeremy Linton
2022-04-20 13:39 ` Jeremy Linton
2022-04-20 16:51 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-20 16:51 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-21 9:34 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-04-21 9:34 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-04-21 15:52 ` Jeremy Linton
2022-04-21 15:52 ` Jeremy Linton
2022-04-21 17:58 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-21 17:58 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-20 16:48 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-20 16:48 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-20 16:51 ` Kees Cook
2022-04-20 16:51 ` Kees Cook
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=Yl/1KertC3/UtwR4@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=szabolcs.nagy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yu-cheng.yu@intel.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.