On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 11:43:49AM -0800, Deepak Gupta wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 5:37 AM Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 04:50:38PM -0800, Deepak Gupta wrote:
> > > How will it do that (currently _ENABLE is married to _WRITE and _PUSH) ?
> > That's feeling moderately firmly
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 5:37 AM Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 04:50:38PM -0800, Deepak Gupta wrote:
>
> > A theoretical scenario (no current workloads should've this case
> > because no shadow stack)
>
> > - User mode did _ENABLE on the main thread. Shadow stack was allocated
> > f
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 09:22:59PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-12-12 at 20:26 +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > In general if things have a need to get at prctl()s via ptrace we
> > should
> > just fix that, at least for arm64 there's things like the vector
> > lengths
> > that are c
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 04:50:38PM -0800, Deepak Gupta wrote:
> A theoretical scenario (no current workloads should've this case
> because no shadow stack)
> - User mode did _ENABLE on the main thread. Shadow stack was allocated
> for the current
> thread.
> - User mode created a bunch worker t
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 11:23 AM Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 11:17:11AM -0800, Deepak Gupta wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 1:43 AM Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > +/*
> > > + * Set the current shadow stack configuration. Enabling the shadow
> > > + * stack will cause a shadow sta
+Mike, who did the CRIU work
Re:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e1362732ba86990b7707d3f5b785358b77c5f896.ca...@intel.com/
On Tue, 2023-12-12 at 20:26 +, Mark Brown wrote:
> The set of locked features is read/write via ptrace in my arm64
> series,
> that's architecture specific unfortunately but
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 08:17:09PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-11-22 at 09:42 +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > These features are expected to be inherited by new threads and
> > cleared
> > on exec(), unknown features should be rejected for enable but
> > accepted
> > for locking (i
On Wed, 2023-11-22 at 09:42 +, Mark Brown wrote:
> These features are expected to be inherited by new threads and
> cleared
> on exec(), unknown features should be rejected for enable but
> accepted
> for locking (in order to allow for future proofing).
The reason why I stuck with arch_prctl w
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 11:17:11AM -0800, Deepak Gupta wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 1:43 AM Mark Brown wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Set the current shadow stack configuration. Enabling the shadow
> > + * stack will cause a shadow stack to be allocated for the thread.
> > + */
> > +#define PR_SET_S
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 1:43 AM Mark Brown wrote:
>
> Three architectures (x86, aarch64, riscv) have announced support for
> shadow stacks with fairly similar functionality. While x86 is using
> arch_prctl() to control the functionality neither arm64 nor riscv uses
> that interface so this patch
Three architectures (x86, aarch64, riscv) have announced support for
shadow stacks with fairly similar functionality. While x86 is using
arch_prctl() to control the functionality neither arm64 nor riscv uses
that interface so this patch adds arch-agnostic prctl() support to
get and set status of s
11 matches
Mail list logo
