2025-03-14T14:39:25-07:00, Deepak Gupta <de...@rivosinc.com>:
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/mman.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/mman.h
> +static inline unsigned long arch_calc_vm_prot_bits(unsigned long prot,
> +                                                unsigned long pkey 
> __always_unused)
> +{
> +     unsigned long ret = 0;
> +
> +     /*
> +      * If PROT_WRITE was specified, force it to VM_READ | VM_WRITE.
> +      * Only VM_WRITE means shadow stack.
> +      */

This function also changes PROT_WX to VM_RWX, which is effectively not
changing anything, but I think it deserves an explicit intent.
(At least in the commit message.)

> +     if (prot & PROT_WRITE)
> +             ret = (VM_READ | VM_WRITE);
> +     return ret;
> +}
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_riscv.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_riscv.c
> @@ -16,6 +17,15 @@ static long riscv_sys_mmap(unsigned long addr, unsigned 
> long len,
> +     /*
> +      * If PROT_WRITE is specified then extend that to PROT_READ
> +      * protection_map[VM_WRITE] is now going to select shadow stack 
> encodings.
> +      * So specifying PROT_WRITE actually should select protection_map 
> [VM_WRITE | VM_READ]
> +      * If user wants to create shadow stack then they should use 
> `map_shadow_stack` syscall.
> +      */
> +     if (unlikely((prot & PROT_WRITE) && !(prot & PROT_READ)))
> +             prot |= PROT_READ;

Why isn't the previous hunk be enough?  (Or why don't we do just this?)

riscv_sys_mmap() eventually calls arch_calc_vm_prot_bits(), so I'd
rather fix each code path just once.

Thanks.

Reply via email to