Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 19:35:15 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/4] x86/pti: don't mark the user PGD with _PAGE_NX.
Message-ID: <20180108183515.7ougslrseroramrs@gmail.com>
References: <1515427939-10999-1-git-send-email-w@1wt.eu>
 <1515427939-10999-4-git-send-email-w@1wt.eu>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1801081803290.1735@nanos>
 <760b7264-1ae7-bcaa-6d20-f47cc7c7fce1@intel.com>
 <20180108175028.acwe3glhw4rsvdsx@gmail.com>
 <20180108182510.3c6dda34@alans-desktop>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180108182510.3c6dda34@alans-desktop>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org


* Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:

> > The simplest model is indeed child inheritance tree propagation - plus perhaps the 
> > ability for a thread to change its *own* PTI status, which obviously doesn't 
> > create any deep "process lookup" or cross-CPU complications.
> > 
> > ( Note that here I only mean "simple to implement" - we might decide to not offer
> >   the ABI. )
> 
> I still think cgroups are the best model for this. In particular it
> naturally fits things like containers, or network facing apps that fork
> helpers.

I think the suggested exec() time inheritance model would naturally also cover 
cgroups (without tying the ABI to cgroups) - as containers typically get inherited 
from a single binary. A bit like how various personality bits get propagated.

Thanks,

	Ingo