On 10/17/18 9:25 PM, Evgenii Stepanov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Andrey Konovalov
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Vincenzo Frascino
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Andrey,
>>> I have been thinking a bit lately on how to address the problem of user
>>> tagged pointers passed to the
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 01:25:42PM -0700, Evgenii Stepanov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Andrey Konovalov
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Vincenzo Frascino
> > wrote:
> >> I have been thinking a bit lately on how to address the problem of
> >> user tagged pointers passe
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Vincenzo Frascino
> wrote:
>> Hi Andrey,
>> I have been thinking a bit lately on how to address the problem of user
>> tagged pointers passed to the kernel through syscalls, and IMHO probably the
>> best
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Vincenzo Frascino
wrote:
> Hi Andrey,
> I have been thinking a bit lately on how to address the problem of user
> tagged pointers passed to the kernel through syscalls, and IMHO probably the
> best way we have to catch them all and make sure that the approach is
Hi Andrey,
On 02/10/2018 14:12, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> arm64 has a feature called Top Byte Ignore, which allows to embed pointer
> tags into the top byte of each pointer. Userspace programs (such as
> HWASan, a memory debugging tool [1]) might use this feature and pass
> tagged user pointers to
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 03:12:35PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
...
> Changes in v7:
> - Rebased onto 17b57b18 (4.19-rc6).
> - Dropped the "arm64: untag user address in __do_user_fault" patch, since
> the existing patches already handle user faults properly.
> - Dropped the "usb, arm64: untag
