Re: [PATCH v6 7/9] x86: Enable Syscall User Dispatch

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 04:31:45PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
>> Syscall User Dispatch requirements are fully supported in x86. This
>> patch flips the switch, marking it as supported.  This was tested
>> against Syscall User Dispatch selftest.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
>> index 7101ac64bb20..56ac8de99021 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
>> @@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ config X86
>>  	select HAVE_ARCH_COMPAT_MMAP_BASES	if MMU && COMPAT
>>  	select HAVE_ARCH_PREL32_RELOCATIONS
>>  	select HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER
>> +	select HAVE_ARCH_SYSCALL_USER_DISPATCH
>
> Is this needed at all? I think simply "the architecture uses the generic
> entry code" is sufficient to enable it. (Especially since there's a top
> level config for SYSCALL_USER_DISPATCH, it feels like overkill).

Maybe it is not necessary.  The reason I have this is to prevent
architectures migrating to the generic entry code from inadvertently
starting to support this feature, without thinking in advance whether
arch_syscall_is_vdso_sigreturn is needed.  If that is not a good reason,
I'm happy to drop it.

-- 
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux