From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6E5C43613 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 15:16:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E91BE206B7 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 15:16:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="WX6lIbG5" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E91BE206B7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=t2TlQmFxdttKgmhDO8yxuBduX4ulwVrBymuLx2BM6r0=; b=WX6lIbG5TzOf2j 1f8SM/pnJ6hJpKCw9r54AJmBzlTegbKBCA1+J4GtbrvPjUrM3dMwaPONgX417NAgfZVTG6BQjLMXl +tOUUxg6pqIvcmX5tHQHNYnUC7Rv89TORr+n/aMTtIM2G9iMxXtmvfTkMQ2ujlQLfGxq9k++CD9c+ D5IMaxavmT0rig+lyb1dL89fsxO4kraAh0lO6LpNTaipKEf2CH3a2Eaq3sVS1iw+I3KNC/0vUT01E aPBg/m0eus3N2Ajpl2bzPziSID/d0VpXj76ITwmD1r6tulykANUzxBnOgVde5e6TGcEuNqAd5PyRn ynCJtK+ZjW8omGYejysg==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1heLHW-0002NI-QD; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 15:16:50 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1heLHT-0002Ma-8u for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 15:16:48 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4CF5344; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 08:16:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arrakis.emea.arm.com (arrakis.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.78]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 558C63F575; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 08:16:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 16:16:41 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Kevin Brodsky Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] arm64: Define Documentation/arm64/tagged-address-abi.txt Message-ID: <20190621151640.GI18954@arrakis.emea.arm.com> References: <20190613155137.47675-1-vincenzo.frascino@arm.com> <20190613155137.47675-2-vincenzo.frascino@arm.com> <1c55a610-9aa5-4675-f7de-79a1661a660d@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1c55a610-9aa5-4675-f7de-79a1661a660d@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190621_081647_413525_A4CC97FA X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 21.28 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Andrey Konovalov , Will Deacon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Alexander Viro , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Vincenzo Frascino , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 02:13:01PM +0100, Kevin Brodsky wrote: > On 13/06/2019 16:51, Vincenzo Frascino wrote: > > +The ARM64 Tagged Address ABI is an opt-in feature, and an application can > > +control it using the following: > > + - /proc/sys/abi/tagged_addr: a new sysctl interface that can be used to > > + prevent the applications from enabling the relaxed ABI. > > + The sysctl is meant also for testing purposes in order to provide a > > + simple way for the userspace to verify the return error checking of > > + the prctl() commands without having to reconfigure the kernel. > > + The sysctl supports the following configuration options: > > + - 0: Disable ARM64 Tagged Address ABI for all the applications. > > + - 1 (Default): Enable ARM64 Tagged Address ABI for all the > > + applications. > > I find this very confusing, because it suggests that the default value of > PR_GET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL for new processes will be set to the value of this > sysctl, when in fact this sysctl is about restricting the *availability* of > the new ABI. Instead of disabling the ABI, I would talk about disabling > access to the new ABI here. This bullet point needs to be re-written. The sysctl is meant to disable opting in to the ABI. I'd also drop the "meant for testing" part. I put it in my commit log as justification but I don't think it should be part of the ABI document. > > + - prctl()s: > > + - PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL: can be used to enable or disable the Tagged > > + Address ABI. > > + The (unsigned int) arg2 argument is a bit mask describing the > > + control mode used: > > + - PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE: Enable ARM64 Tagged Address ABI. > > + The arguments arg3, arg4, and arg5 are ignored. > > Have we definitely decided that arg{3,4,5} are ignored? Catalin? I don't have a strong preference either way. If it's simpler for the user to ignore them, fine by me. I can see in the current prctl commands a mix if ignore vs forced zero. > > +the ABI guarantees the following behaviours: > > + > > + - Every current or newly introduced syscall can accept any valid tagged > > + pointers. > "pointer". Also, is it really useful to talk about newly introduced syscall? > New from which point of view? I think we should drop this guarantee. It would have made sense if we allowed tagged pointers everywhere but we already have some exceptions. > > +3. ARM64 Tagged Address ABI Exceptions > > +-------------------------------------- > > + > > +The behaviours described in section 2, with particular reference to the > > +acceptance by the syscalls of any valid tagged pointer are not applicable > > +to the following cases: > > + - mmap() addr parameter. > > + - mremap() new_address parameter. > > + - prctl_set_mm() struct prctl_map fields. > > + - prctl_set_mm_map() struct prctl_map fields. > > prctl_set_mm() and prctl_set_mm_map() are internal kernel functions, not > syscall names. IIUC, we don't want to allow any address field settable via > the PR_SET_MM prctl() to be tagged. Catalin, is that correct? I think this > needs rephrasing. I fully agree. It should talk about PR_SET_MM, PR_SET_MM_MAP, PR_SET_MM_MAP_SIZE. -- Catalin _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel