lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64/crash_core: Export KERNELPACMASK in vmcoreinfo
From
Date
Hi,

On 5/6/20 6:01 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 05:32:56PM +0530, Amit Kachhap wrote:
>> On 5/4/20 10:47 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:55:01AM +0530, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/compiler.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/compiler.h
>>>> index eece20d..32d5900 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/compiler.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/compiler.h
>>>> @@ -19,6 +19,9 @@
>>>> #define __builtin_return_address(val) \
>>>> (void *)(ptrauth_clear_pac((unsigned long)__builtin_return_address(val)))
>>>> +#else /* !CONFIG_ARM64_PTR_AUTH */
>>>> +#define ptrauth_user_pac_mask() 0ULL
>>>> +#define ptrauth_kernel_pac_mask() 0ULL
>>>
>>> This doesn't look quite right to me, since you still have to take into
>>> account the case where CONFIG_ARM64_PTR_AUTH=y but the feature is not
>>> available at runtime:
>>
>> Yes agree with you here. However the config gaurd is saving some extra
>> computation for __builtin_return_address. There are some compiler
>> support being added in __builtin_extract_return_address to mask the PAC.
>> Hopefully that will improve this code. In the meantime let it be like this.
>
> Does the extra computation matter? Isn't it just a couple of instructions?

ok sure. I will push v3 as you suggested.

Thanks,
Amit

>
> Will
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-06 15:05    [W:0.044 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site