From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Cedric Xing <cedric.xing@intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>,
"Dr . Greg Wettstein" <greg@enjellic.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/12] x86/sgx: Require userspace to define enclave pages' protection bits
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 17:43:11 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dc3d59c2783ea81d85d4d447bd1a4a2d5fe51421.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190617222438.2080-5-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
On Mon, 2019-06-17 at 15:24 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> + __u32 flags;
This should be changed to secinfo_flags_mask containing a mask of the
allowed bits for the secinfo flags because of two obvious reasons:
1. Protection flags are used mainly with syscalls and contain also other
things than just the permissions that do not apply in this context.
2. Having a mask for all secinfo flags is more future proof.
With the protection flags you end up reserving bits forever for things
that we will never have any use for (e.g. PROT_SEM).
Looking the change you convert 'flags' (wondering why it isn't called
'prot') to VM flags, which means that you essentially gain absolutely
nothing and loose some potential versatility as a side-effect by doing
that.
/Jarkko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-19 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-17 22:24 [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] security: x86/sgx: SGX vs. LSM, round 3 Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 01/12] x86/sgx: Add mm to enclave at mmap() Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:32 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 23:42 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-18 14:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 16:06 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 12:56 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 13:00 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-20 20:09 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 02/12] x86/sgx: Do not naturally align MAP_FIXED address Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 13:24 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 14:08 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-20 22:07 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 03/12] selftests: x86/sgx: Mark the enclave loader as not needing an exec stack Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 04/12] x86/sgx: Require userspace to define enclave pages' protection bits Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 14:43 ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
2019-06-19 15:20 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-20 22:17 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-07-07 19:08 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-07-08 15:23 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-07-08 16:19 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-07-09 16:06 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-07-10 17:25 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-07-15 22:29 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-01 16:38 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-08-04 22:20 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-05 20:51 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-08-05 21:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-07 18:51 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 05/12] x86/sgx: Enforce noexec filesystem restriction for enclaves Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 14:46 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 06/12] mm: Introduce vm_ops->may_mprotect() Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 07/12] LSM: x86/sgx: Introduce ->enclave_map() hook for Intel SGX Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 08/12] security/selinux: Require SGX_EXECMEM to map enclave page WX Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 09/12] LSM: x86/sgx: Introduce ->enclave_load() hook for Intel SGX Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 14:56 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 21:13 ` James Morris
2019-06-20 9:28 ` Dr. Greg
2019-06-20 22:22 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-23 17:16 ` Dr. Greg
2019-06-26 20:39 ` James Morris
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 10/12] security/selinux: Add enclave_load() implementation Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 14:49 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-06-19 20:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 11/12] security/apparmor: " Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 12/12] LSM: x86/sgx: Show line of sight to LSM support SGX2's EAUG Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 13:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] security: x86/sgx: SGX vs. LSM, round 3 Stephen Smalley
2019-06-18 13:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 15:13 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-06-25 16:29 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
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=dc3d59c2783ea81d85d4d447bd1a4a2d5fe51421.camel@linux.intel.com \
--to=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=cedric.xing@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=greg@enjellic.com \
--cc=jethro@fortanix.com \
--cc=linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@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.