On Thu, 2020-05-07 at 08:55 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:

On 4/29/20 3:07 PM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:

quoted

+config X86_INTEL_SHADOW_STACK_USER
+	prompt "Intel Shadow Stacks for user-mode"
+	def_bool n
+	depends on CPU_SUP_INTEL && X86_64
+	depends on AS_HAS_SHADOW_STACK
+	select ARCH_USES_HIGH_VMA_FLAGS
+	select X86_INTEL_CET
+	select ARCH_HAS_SHADOW_STACK

I called protection keys: X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS

AMD recently posted documentation which shows them implementing it as
well.  The "INTEL_" is feeling now like a mistake.

Going forward, we should probably avoid sticking the company name on
them, if for no other reason than avoiding confusion and/or churn in the
future.

Shadow stacks, for instance, seem like something that another vendor
might implement one day.  So, let's at least remove the "INTEL_" from
the config option names themselves.  Mentioning Intel in the changelog
and the Kconfig help text is fine.

Yes, sure.

Yu-cheng