[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZwW9m6pqcTFBovuG@debug.ba.rivosinc.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 16:17:47 -0700
From: Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
Cc: "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>, "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
"lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com" <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"vbabka@...e.cz" <vbabka@...e.cz>,
"brauner@...nel.org" <brauner@...nel.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"palmer@...belt.com" <palmer@...belt.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"paul.walmsley@...ive.com" <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
"Liam.Howlett@...cle.com" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
"oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"krzk+dt@...nel.org" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
"conor@...nel.org" <conor@...nel.org>,
"ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"kees@...nel.org" <kees@...nel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>,
"broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
"jim.shu@...ive.com" <jim.shu@...ive.com>,
"alistair.francis@....com" <alistair.francis@....com>,
"cleger@...osinc.com" <cleger@...osinc.com>,
"kito.cheng@...ive.com" <kito.cheng@...ive.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"samitolvanen@...gle.com" <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
"evan@...osinc.com" <evan@...osinc.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"atishp@...osinc.com" <atishp@...osinc.com>,
"andybnac@...il.com" <andybnac@...il.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"charlie@...osinc.com" <charlie@...osinc.com>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
"richard.henderson@...aro.org" <richard.henderson@...aro.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"alexghiti@...osinc.com" <alexghiti@...osinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 16/33] riscv/shstk: If needed allocate a new shadow
stack on clone
On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 10:55:29PM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
>On Tue, 2024-10-08 at 15:36 -0700, Deepak Gupta wrote:
>> +unsigned long shstk_alloc_thread_stack(struct task_struct *tsk,
>> + const struct kernel_clone_args *args)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long addr, size;
>> +
>> + /* If shadow stack is not supported, return 0 */
>> + if (!cpu_supports_shadow_stack())
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * If shadow stack is not enabled on the new thread, skip any
>> + * switch to a new shadow stack.
>> + */
>> + if (!is_shstk_enabled(tsk))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * For CLONE_VFORK the child will share the parents shadow stack.
>> + * Set base = 0 and size = 0, this is special means to track this state
>> + * so the freeing logic run for child knows to leave it alone.
>> + */
>> + if (args->flags & CLONE_VFORK) {
>> + set_shstk_base(tsk, 0, 0);
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * For !CLONE_VM the child will use a copy of the parents shadow
>> + * stack.
>> + */
>> + if (!(args->flags & CLONE_VM))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * reaching here means, CLONE_VM was specified and thus a separate shadow
>> + * stack is needed for new cloned thread. Note: below allocation is happening
>> + * using current mm.
>> + */
>> + size = calc_shstk_size(args->stack_size);
>> + addr = allocate_shadow_stack(0, size, 0, false);
>> + if (IS_ERR_VALUE(addr))
>> + return addr;
>> +
>> + set_shstk_base(tsk, addr, size);
>> +
>> + return addr + size;
>> +}
>
>A lot of this patch and the previous one is similar to x86's and arm's. It great
>that we can have consistency around this behavior.
>
>There might be enough consistency to refactor some of the arch code into a
>kernel/shstk.c.
>
>Should we try?
Yeah you're right. Honestly, I've been shameless in adapting most of the flows
from x86 `shstk.c` for risc-v. So thank you for that.
Now that we've `ARCH_HAS_USER_SHADOW_STACK` part of multiple patch series (riscv
shadowstack, clone3 and I think arm64 gcs series as well). It's probably the
appropriate time to find common grounds.
This is what I suggest
- move most of the common/arch agnostic shadow stack stuff in kernel/shstk.c
This gets part of compile if `ARCH_HAS_USER_SHADOW_STACK` is enabled/selected.
- allow arch specific branch out guard checks for "if cpu supports", "is shadow stack
enabled on the task_struct" (I expect each arch layout of task_struct will be
different, no point finding common ground there), etc.
I think it's worth a try.
If you already don't have patches, I'll spend some time to see what it takes to
converge in my next version. If I end up into some roadblock, will use this thread
for further discussion.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists