On 5/28/20 2:23 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com> writes:
On Thu 2020-05-28 11:03:43, Michael Ellerman wrote:
Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com> writes:
The commit 0ebeea8ca8a4d1d453a ("bpf: Restrict bpf_probe_read{, str}() only
to archs where they work") caused that bpf_probe_read{, str}() functions
were not longer available on architectures where the same logical address
might have different content in kernel and user memory mapping. These
architectures should use probe_read_{user,kernel}_str helpers.
For backward compatibility, the problematic functions are still available
on architectures where the user and kernel address spaces are not
overlapping. This is defined CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NON_OVERLAPPING_ADDRESS_SPACE.
At the moment, these backward compatible functions are enabled only
on x86_64, arm, and arm64. Let's do it also on powerpc that has
the non overlapping address space as well.
Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com>
This seems like it should have a Fixes: tag and go into v5.7?
Good point:
Fixes: commit 0ebeea8ca8a4d1d4 ("bpf: Restrict bpf_probe_read{, str}() only to archs
where they work")
And yes, it should ideally go into v5.7 either directly or via stable.
Should I resend the patch with Fixes and
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org #v45.7 lines, please?
If it goes into v5.7 then it doesn't need a Cc: stable, and I guess a
Fixes: tag is nice to have but not so important as it already mentions
the commit that caused the problem. So a resend probably isn't
necessary.
Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au>
Daniel can you pick this up, or should I?
Yeah I'll take it into bpf tree for v5.7.
Thanks everyone,
Daniel