Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1 v2] x86: pkey-mprotect must allow pkey-0 | From | Dave Hansen <> | Date | Wed, 14 Mar 2018 10:51:26 -0700 |
| |
On 03/14/2018 10:14 AM, Ram Pai wrote: > I look at key-0 as 'the key'. It has special status. > (a) It always exist.
Do you mean "is always allocated"?
> (b) it cannot be freed.
This is the one I'm questioning.
> (c) it is assigned by default.
I agree on this totally. :)
> (d) its permissions cannot be modified.
Why not? You could pretty easily get a thread going that had its stack covered with another pkey and that was being very careful what it accesses. It could pretty easily set pkey-0's access or write-disable bits.
> (e) it bypasses key-permission checks when assigned.
I don't think this is necessary. I think the only rule we *need* is:
pkey-0 is allocated implicitly at execve() time. You do not need to call pkey_alloc() to allocate it.
> An arch need not necessarily map 'the key-0' to its key-0. It could > internally map it to any of its internal key of its choice, transparent > to the application.
I don't understand what you are saying here.
| |