On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 11:56:49AM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:

On 8/27/20 11:38 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 07:27:06PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:

quoted

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
index 7717ea9bc2a7..cfac7d02f032 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/mte.c

@@ -18,10 +18,14 @@
 
 #include <asm/barrier.h>
 #include <asm/cpufeature.h>
+#include <asm/kasan.h>
+#include <asm/kprobes.h>
 #include <asm/mte.h>
 #include <asm/ptrace.h>
 #include <asm/sysreg.h>
 
+u64 gcr_kernel_excl __read_mostly;

Could we make this __ro_after_init?

Yes, it makes sense, it should be updated only once through mte_init_tags().

Something to consider though here is that this might not be the right approach
if in future we want to add stack tagging. In such a case we need to know the
kernel exclude mask before any C code is executed. Initializing the mask via
mte_init_tags() it is too late.

It depends on how stack tagging ends up in the kernel, whether it uses
ADDG/SUBG or not. If it's only IRG, I think it can cope with changing
the GCR_EL1.Excl in the middle of a function.

I was thinking to add a compilation define instead of having gcr_kernel_excl in
place. This might not work if the kernel excl mask is meant to change during the
execution.

A macro with the default value works for me. That's what it basically is
currently, only that it ends up in a variable.

-- 
Catalin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel