[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <325ad22d278d85e6ea6a91691c5715b6b65dab09.camel@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 20:18:43 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "dietmar.eggemann@....com" <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
"broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>, "Szabolcs.Nagy@....com"
<Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>, "brauner@...nel.org" <brauner@...nel.org>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"debug@...osinc.com" <debug@...osinc.com>, "mgorman@...e.de"
<mgorman@...e.de>, "vincent.guittot@...aro.org" <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
"fweimer@...hat.com" <fweimer@...hat.com>, "mingo@...hat.com"
<mingo@...hat.com>, "rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"hjl.tools@...il.com" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, "tglx@...utronix.de"
<tglx@...utronix.de>, "vschneid@...hat.com" <vschneid@...hat.com>,
"shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>, "bristot@...hat.com"
<bristot@...hat.com>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, "peterz@...radead.org"
<peterz@...radead.org>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "bsegall@...gle.com"
<bsegall@...gle.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"juri.lelli@...hat.com" <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
CC: "david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>, "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-api@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"jannh@...gle.com" <jannh@...gle.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "catalin.marinas@....com"
<catalin.marinas@....com>, "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v5 0/7] fork: Support shadow stacks in clone3()
On Sat, 2024-02-03 at 00:04 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> Please note that the x86 portions of this code are build tested only,
> I
> don't appear to have a system that can run CET avaible to me, I have
> done testing with an integration into my pending work for GCS. There
> is
> some possibility that the arm64 implementation may require the use of
> clone3() and explicit userspace allocation of shadow stacks, this is
> still under discussion.
It all passed for me on the x86 side.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists