Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: consider effective protection attributes in W+X check

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>,
	hpa@zytor.com, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	mingo@elte.hu, sds@tycho.nsa.gov,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: consider effective protection attributes in W+X check
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:12:03 +0100 (CET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712141505180.4998__8162.68998100913$1513260834$gmane$org@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fcb65c2e-d0eb-24c2-ad2b-e956291db01a@suse.com>

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 12/12/17 11:31, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >  	for (i = 0; i < PTRS_PER_PMD; i++) {
> >  		st->current_address = normalize_addr(P + i * PMD_LEVEL_MULT);
> >  		if (!pmd_none(*start)) {
> > +			prot = pmd_flags(*start);
> > +			eff = effective_prot(eff_in, prot);
> >  			if (pmd_large(*start) || !pmd_present(*start)) {
> > -				prot = pmd_flags(*start);
> > -				note_page(m, st, __pgprot(prot), 4);
> > +				note_page(m, st, __pgprot(prot), eff, 4);
> >  			} else if (!kasan_page_table(m, st, pmd_start)) {
> > -				walk_pte_level(m, st, *start,
> > +				walk_pte_level(m, st, *start, eff,
> >  					       P + i * PMD_LEVEL_MULT);
> >  			}
> 
> You can drop the braces for both cases. Applies to similar
> constructs below, too.

No. See: https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=148467980905537

This is the same issue:

	if (foo)
		bla();
	else
		blurb(somestuff, morestuff, evenmorestuff,
		      crap);
vs.

	if (foo) {
		bla();
	} else {
		blurb(somestuff, morestuff, evenmorestuff,
		      crap);
	}

Thanks,

	tglx

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel