From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Bill Roberts <bill.roberts@arm.com>,
rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/shstk: shadow stack enabling write return code change
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2026 09:46:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f9223651-a51d-471d-805d-e9a2ee9c6b51@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260707184542.1721085-1-bill.roberts@arm.com>
On 7/7/26 11:45, Bill Roberts wrote:
> The WRSS instruction (the special instruction that writes to shadow stacks)
> cannot be used in userspace unless IA32_U_CET.SH_STK_EN=1 (user shadow
> stack is enabled). So the kernel *should* return -EINVAL to userspace if
> it tries to enable it when shadow stack is disabled. However, currently,
> it will return -EPERM. But, that error code doesn't fit the condition as
> the failure is due to an invalid state change request not a permission
> issue.
>
> Investigating userspace call sites, like glibc and criu (checkpoint code),
> they do not rely on this specific error message, nor could a userspace
> effectively utilize this specific return error code to indicate a
> difference in "I cannot enable write because of invalid permissions"
> versus "I cannot enable write because the shadow stack is disabled".
Hi Bill,
Thanks for the patch. One bit of context I'd appreciate: why do you
care? Were you just auditing the code and something seemed wrong? Were
you doing some ARM code and noticed a mismatch?
What motivated the change?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-08 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-07 18:45 Bill Roberts
2026-07-07 18:56 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-07-08 16:46 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2026-07-08 20:56 ` Bill Roberts
2026-07-08 21:00 ` Dave Hansen
2026-07-14 20:22 ` Bill Roberts
2026-07-14 20:27 ` Dave Hansen
2026-09-02 21:11 ` [tip: x86/cpu] x86/shstk: Shadow " tip-bot2 for Bill Roberts
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=f9223651-a51d-471d-805d-e9a2ee9c6b51@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=bill.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@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®