linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] kselftest/arm64: Add coverage for the interaction of vfork() and GCS

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: <33d51f33-3597-4a5b-b54e-0292f12aac69@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 13:02:24 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] kselftest/arm64: Add coverage for the interaction
 of vfork() and GCS

On Fri, Jul 04, 2025 at 01:27:28PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:

> FYI nolibc now has a proper prctl() implementation you might want to use.

That's open coded because we absolutely cannot tolerate the prctl() to
enable GCS being anything other than inlined, returning from an actual
function call would crash.  Probably for nolibc that'd mostly work out
but it seems better to be very clear about the inlining.

> Also your vfork() selftest uncovered a bug in the brandnew SuperH support.

Ah, doing good work already!

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)