Re: Rethinking sigcontext's xfeatures slightly for PKRU's benefit?

From: Dave Hansen
Date: Fri Dec 18 2015 - 16:12:48 EST


On 12/18/2015 01:04 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> IOW, I like my idea in which signal delivery always sets PKRU to the
>> application-requested-by-syscall values and sigreturn restores it.
>
> So I don't mind that, as long as the whole "sigreturn restores it" is
> part of things.
>
> Your original email with the suggestion to *not* resture PKRU I didn't
> like. Setting it and restoring it is fine.
>
> I do wonder if you need an explicit value, though. I think it's
> reasonable to say that PKRU value 0 is special. It's what we'd start
> processes with, and why not just say that it's what we run signal
> handlers in?
>
> Would any other value ever make sense, really?

Having a PKRU with the execute-only permissions set is the only one I
can think of. For a system with a _dedicated_ PKEY for execute-only,
this is easy and could even be made a part of init_fpstate with no other
code changes.

But, if we are picking out an execute-only pkey more dynamically, we've
got to keep the default value for the entire process somewhere.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/