From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
Cc: "dietmar.eggemann@arm.com" <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
"Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com" <Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com>,
"brauner@kernel.org" <brauner@kernel.org>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"debug@rivosinc.com" <debug@rivosinc.com>,
"mgorman@suse.de" <mgorman@suse.de>,
"vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
"fweimer@redhat.com" <fweimer@redhat.com>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"rostedt@goodmis.org" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"hjl.tools@gmail.com" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"vschneid@redhat.com" <vschneid@redhat.com>,
"shuah@kernel.org" <shuah@kernel.org>,
"bristot@redhat.com" <bristot@redhat.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
"bsegall@google.com" <bsegall@google.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"juri.lelli@redhat.com" <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
"keescook@chromium.org" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"jannh@google.com" <jannh@google.com>,
"linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"linux-api@vger.kernel.org" <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
"will@kernel.org" <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v5 4/7] fork: Add shadow stack support to clone3()
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 15:38:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cc43d304-e24b-40fd-9205-fd27889e6a24@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <565ca9697cf26be5509ef4b3c1cc95fa4f692b9f.camel@intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 771 bytes --]
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 08:18:11PM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Sat, 2024-02-03 at 00:05 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > + if (write_user_shstk_64((u64 __user *)addr, 0))
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + return true;
> > +}
> So, don't we want to consume the token on the *new* task's MM, which
> was already duplicated but still unmapped? In which case I think the
> other arch's would need to GUP regardless of the existence of shadow
> stack atomic ops.
Yes, that would be better - if nothing else it allows reuse of the same
shadow stack for multiple !CLONE_VM clone3()s.
> I wonder about adding a shstk_post_fork() to make it easier to think
> about and maintain, even if there are no issues today.
I agree.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-12 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-03 0:04 [PATCH RFT v5 0/7] fork: Support shadow stacks in clone3() Mark Brown
2024-02-03 0:04 ` [PATCH RFT v5 1/7] Documentation: userspace-api: Add shadow stack API documentation Mark Brown
2024-02-04 1:33 ` Randy Dunlap
2024-02-15 4:08 ` Deepak Gupta
2024-02-03 0:04 ` [PATCH RFT v5 2/7] selftests: Provide helper header for shadow stack testing Mark Brown
2024-02-09 20:24 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2024-02-03 0:04 ` [PATCH RFT v5 3/7] mm: Introduce ARCH_HAS_USER_SHADOW_STACK Mark Brown
2024-02-09 20:21 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2024-02-15 4:14 ` Deepak Gupta
2024-02-03 0:05 ` [PATCH RFT v5 4/7] fork: Add shadow stack support to clone3() Mark Brown
2024-02-09 20:18 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2024-02-10 0:55 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2024-02-12 15:38 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2024-02-10 0:56 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2024-02-03 0:05 ` [PATCH RFT v5 5/7] selftests/clone3: Factor more of main loop into test_clone3() Mark Brown
2024-02-03 0:05 ` [PATCH RFT v5 6/7] selftests/clone3: Allow tests to flag if -E2BIG is a valid error code Mark Brown
2024-02-03 0:05 ` [PATCH RFT v5 7/7] selftests/clone3: Test shadow stack support Mark Brown
2024-02-09 20:18 ` [PATCH RFT v5 0/7] fork: Support shadow stacks in clone3() Edgecombe, Rick P
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=cc43d304-e24b-40fd-9205-fd27889e6a24@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=debug@rivosinc.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®