Re: [PATCH v11 25/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack
From: Yu, Yu-cheng <hidden>
Date: 2020-08-27 18:13:55
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-doc, linux-mm, lkml
From: Yu, Yu-cheng <hidden>
Date: 2020-08-27 18:13:55
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-doc, linux-mm, lkml
On 8/27/2020 6:36 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* H. J. Lu:quoted
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 6:19 AM Florian Weimer [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
* Dave Martin:quoted
You're right that this has implications: for i386, libc probably pulls more arguments off the stack than are really there in some situations. This isn't a new problem though. There are already generic prctls with fewer than 4 args that are used on x86.As originally posted, glibc prctl would have to know that it has to pull an u64 argument off the argument list for ARCH_X86_CET_DISABLE. But then the u64 argument is a problem for arch_prctl as well.Argument of ARCH_X86_CET_DISABLE is int and passed in register.The commit message and the C source say otherwise, I think (not sure about the C source, not a kernel hacker).
H.J. Lu suggested that we fix x86 arch_prctl() to take four arguments, and then keep MMAP_SHSTK as an arch_prctl(). Because now the map flags and size are all in registers, this also solves problems being pointed out earlier. Without a wrapper, the shadow stack mmap call (from user space) will be: syscall(_NR_arch_prctl, ARCH_X86_CET_MMAP_SHSTK, size, MAP_32BIT). I think this would be a nice alternative to another new syscall. If this looks good to everyone, I can send out new patches as response to my current version, and then after all issues fixed, send v12. Thanks, Yu-cheng