From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>,
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
"H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: Enable BTI for main executable as well as the interpreter
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 16:34:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210610153426.GP4187@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YMIRSSMnP3UMwdRy@sirena.org.uk>
On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 02:19:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 04:17:13PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 12:24:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > - if (system_supports_bti() && has_interp == is_interp &&
> > > - (*p & GNU_PROPERTY_AARCH64_FEATURE_1_BTI))
> > > - arch->flags |= ARM64_ELF_BTI;
> > > + if (system_supports_bti() &&
> > > + (*p & GNU_PROPERTY_AARCH64_FEATURE_1_BTI)) {
> > > + if (is_interp) {
> > > + arch->flags |= ARM64_ELF_INTERP_BTI;
> > > + } else {
> > > + arch->flags |= ARM64_ELF_EXEC_BTI;
> > > + }
>
> > Nit: surplus curlies? (coding-style.rst does actually say to drop them
> > when all branches of an if are single-statement one-liners -- I had
> > presumed I was just being pedantic...)
>
> I really think this hurts readability with the nested if inside
> another if with a multi-line condition.
So long as there is a reason rather than it being purely an accident of
editing, that's fine.
(Though if the nested if can be flattened so that this becomes a non-
issue, that's good too :)
> > > - if (prot & PROT_EXEC)
> > > - prot |= PROT_BTI;
> > > + if (state->flags & ARM64_ELF_EXEC_BTI && !is_interp)
> > > + prot |= PROT_BTI;
> > > + }
>
> > Is it worth adding () around the bitwise-& expressions? I'm always a
> > little uneasy about the operator precedence of binary &, although
> > without looking it up I think you're correct.
>
> Sure. I'm fairly sure the compiler would've complained about
> this case if it were ambiguous, I'm vaguely surprised it didn't
> already.
I was vaguely surprised too -- though I didn't try to compile this
myself yet. Anyway, not a huge deal. Adding a helper to generate the
appropriate mask would make this issue go away in any case, but so long
as you're confident this is being evaluated as intended I can take your
word for it.
> > Feel free to adopt if this appeals to you, otherwise I'm also fine with
> > your version.)
>
> I'll see what I think when I get back to looking at this
> properly.
Ack -- again, this was just a suggestion. I can also live with your
original code if you ultimately decide to stick with that.
Cheers
---Dave
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-10 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-04 11:24 [PATCH v2 0/3] arm64: Enable BTI for the " Mark Brown
2021-06-04 11:24 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] elf: Allow architectures to parse properties on the main executable Mark Brown
2021-06-09 15:16 ` Dave Martin
2021-06-10 13:41 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-04 11:24 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: Enable BTI for main executable as well as the interpreter Mark Brown
2021-06-09 15:17 ` Dave Martin
2021-06-10 13:19 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-10 15:34 ` Dave Martin [this message]
2021-06-04 11:24 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] elf: Remove has_interp property from arch_adjust_elf_prot() Mark Brown
2021-06-09 15:17 ` Dave Martin
2021-06-09 16:55 ` Yu, Yu-cheng
2021-06-10 9:58 ` Dave Martin
2021-06-10 18:17 ` Yu, Yu-cheng
2021-06-10 13:34 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-10 15:40 ` Dave Martin
2021-06-10 16:28 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] arm64: Enable BTI for the executable as well as the interpreter Jeremy Linton
2021-06-14 16:00 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-15 15:22 ` Dave Martin
2021-06-15 15:33 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-15 15:41 ` Dave Martin
2021-06-16 5:12 ` Jeremy Linton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210610153426.GP4187@arm.com \
--to=dave.martin@arm.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=szabolcs.nagy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yu-cheng.yu@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).