Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20181026195146.9C7C1136@viggo.jf.intel.com> <0e5fd8bc-0b18-ea88-ed95-ec81a44d0783@intel.com>
 <CA+DvKQLpizz2LJppOts1fB6ujQNqj0fii8mo-UfosoYpQWRb5g@mail.gmail.com> <FA6429E0-C480-47AA-AAF0-95E615D8265B@amacapital.net>
In-Reply-To: <FA6429E0-C480-47AA-AAF0-95E615D8265B@amacapital.net>
From:   Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Oct 2018 18:56:21 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+DvKQJYmWm6uP6k4HYdkuTdMX7=rSu34W2j-Vk8YcnWZVA-3w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/pkeys: copy pkey state at fork()
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, jroedel@suse.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 18:12, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 26, 2018, at 2:39 PM, Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> wrote=
:
> >
> > I ended up working around this with a pthread_atfork handler disabling
> > my usage of the feature in the child process for the time being. I
> > don't have an easy way to detect if the bug is present within a
> > library so
>
> Can you not just make sure that the fix is backported to all relevant ker=
nels?

There are too many different distribution kernels and I won't be in
control of where the software is used.

> I suppose we could add a new flag for pkey_get() or something.

That would work, since I can apply the workaround (disabling the
feature in child processes) if I get EINVAL. The flag wouldn't need to
do anything, just existing and being tied to this patch so I have a
way to detect that I can safely use MPK after fork.

> > I'm going to need a kernel version check with a table of
> > kernel releases fixing the problem for each stable branch.
>
> That won=E2=80=99t work right on district kernels. Please don=E2=80=99t g=
o there.

If it's backported to an earlier version, it will just mean missing a
chance to use it. I'm not going to assume that it behaves a certain
way based on having an old kernel, but rather I just won't use it in a
forked child on an older kernel version if I don't have a way to
detect the problem. It's for a few different uses in library code so
I can't have a runtime test trying to detect it with clone(...). I'd
definitely prefer a proper way to detect that I can use it after fork. I re=
ally
don't want to have a hack like that which is why I'm bringing it up.