Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1419954

Re: [PATCH 2/9] mm: implement new pkey_mprotect() system call

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Proposed semantics:
> 1. protection key 0 is special and represents the default,
>    unassigned protection key.  It is always allocated.
> 2. mprotect() never affects a mapping's pkey_mprotect()-assigned
>    protection key. A protection key of 0 (even if set explicitly)
>    represents an unassigned protection key.
>    2a. mprotect(PROT_EXEC) on a mapping with an assigned protection
>        key may or may not result in a mapping with execute-only
>        properties.  pkey_mprotect() plus pkey_set() on all threads
>        should be used to _guarantee_ execute-only semantics.
> 3. mprotect(PROT_EXEC) may result in an "execute-only" mapping. The
>    kernel will internally attempt to allocate and dedicate a
>    protection key for the purpose of execute-only mappings.  This
>    may not be possible in cases where there are no free protection
>    keys available.

Shouldn't we just reserve a protection key for PROT_EXEC unconditionally?

Thanks,

	tglx

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH 2/9] mm: implement new pkey_mprotect() system call Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net> - 2016-06-09 02:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 2/9] mm: implement new pkey_mprotect() system call Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2016-06-11 11:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 2/9] mm: implement new pkey_mprotect() system call Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net> - 2016-06-13 18:10 +0200

csiph-web