Re: [NEEDS-REVIEW] Re: [PATCH v11 25/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack
From: Dave Hansen <hidden>
Date: 2020-09-15 19:24:55
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-doc, linux-mm, lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2021-09-23 · Re: [NEEDS-REVIEW] Re: [PATCH v11 25/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack · "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
- 2021-09-20 · Re: [NEEDS-REVIEW] Re: [PATCH v11 25/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack · "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@kernel.org>
- 2021-09-14 · Re: [NEEDS-REVIEW] Re: [PATCH v11 25/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack · Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
- 2021-09-14 · Re: [NEEDS-REVIEW] Re: [PATCH v11 25/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack · "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
- 2020-09-14 · Re: [NEEDS-REVIEW] Re: [PATCH v11 25/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack · Yu, Yu-cheng <hidden>
On 9/15/20 12:08 PM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
On Mon, 2020-09-14 at 17:12 -0700, Yu, Yu-cheng wrote:quoted
On 9/14/2020 7:50 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:quoted
On 9/11/20 3:59 PM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote: ...quoted
Here are the changes if we take the mprotect(PROT_SHSTK) approach. Any comments/suggestions?I still don't like it. :) I'll also be much happier when there's a proper changelog to accompany this which also spells out the alternatives any why they suck so much.[...] I revised it. If this turns out needing more work/discussion, we can split it out from the shadow stack series.
Where does that leave things? You only get shadow stacks for single-threaded apps which have the ELF bits set?