linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rust: add flags for shadow call stack sanitizer

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANiq72nQOMjBgz+4gzDhT0kVjVwn23OD0F=S8oZf-yf0+js5rA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2024 13:09:24 +0100
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Cc: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, 
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Jamie Cunliffe <Jamie.Cunliffe@....com>, 
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, 
	Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, 
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, 
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, 
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, 
	Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, 
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, 
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>, 
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: add flags for shadow call stack sanitizer

On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 9:10 PM Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Sure, having a custom target description for the kernel might be
> useful for other purposes too. In the meantime:

Yeah, though to be clear: eventually the goal is to avoid using the
`target.json` since it will not be stable, i.e. the support we have
for `target.json` is good for having the maximum flexibility, but it
is only a workaround for the beginning.

So for each arch we need to get things stable in one way or another
that does not require a custom `target.json` (`-Ctarget-feature`s
where they make sense; otherwise "global target features"/target
options/flags or new builtin targets).

Cheers,
Miguel