[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aMwtdtRHT7oHhYLf@willie-the-truck>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 17:04:06 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, brauner@...nel.org
Cc: "Rick P. Edgecombe" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com>,
Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, jannh@...gle.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Yury Khrustalev <yury.khrustalev@....com>,
Wilco Dijkstra <wilco.dijkstra@....com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 4/8] fork: Add shadow stack support to clone3()
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 01:38:53PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 12:12:09AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Unlike with the normal stack there is no API for configuring the shadow
> > stack for a new thread, instead the kernel will dynamically allocate a
> > new shadow stack with the same size as the normal stack. This appears to
> > be due to the shadow stack series having been in development since
> > before the more extensible clone3() was added rather than anything more
> > deliberate.
> >
> > Add a parameter to clone3() specifying a shadow stack pointer to use
> > for the new thread, this is inconsistent with the way we specify the
> > normal stack but during review concerns were expressed about having to
> > identify where the shadow stack pointer should be placed especially in
> > cases where the shadow stack has been previously active. If no shadow
> > stack is specified then the existing implicit allocation behaviour is
> > maintained.
> >
> > If a shadow stack pointer is specified then it is required to have an
> > architecture defined token placed on the stack, this will be consumed by
> > the new task, the shadow stack is specified by pointing to this token. If
> > no valid token is present then this will be reported with -EINVAL. This
> > token prevents new threads being created pointing at the shadow stack of
> > an existing running thread. On architectures with support for userspace
> > pivoting of shadow stacks it is expected that the same format and placement
> > of tokens will be used, this is the case for arm64 and x86.
> >
> > If the architecture does not support shadow stacks the shadow stack
> > pointer must be not be specified, architectures that do support the
> > feature are expected to enforce the same requirement on individual
> > systems that lack shadow stack support.
> >
> > Update the existing arm64 and x86 implementations to pay attention to
> > the newly added arguments, in order to maintain compatibility we use the
> > existing behaviour if no shadow stack is specified. Since we are now
> > using more fields from the kernel_clone_args we pass that into the
> > shadow stack code rather than individual fields.
> >
> > Portions of the x86 architecture code were written by Rick Edgecombe.
> >
> > Acked-by: Yury Khrustalev <yury.khrustalev@....com>
> > Reviewed-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/mm/gcs.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++-
> > arch/x86/include/asm/shstk.h | 11 +++--
> > arch/x86/kernel/process.c | 2 +-
> > arch/x86/kernel/shstk.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++---
> > include/asm-generic/cacheflush.h | 11 +++++
> > include/linux/sched/task.h | 17 ++++++++
> > include/uapi/linux/sched.h | 9 ++--
> > kernel/fork.c | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > 8 files changed, 217 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>
> It would be great if Christian could give this the thumbs up, given that
> it changes clone3(). I think the architecture parts are all ready at this
> point.
ah, I may have spoken too soon :/
Catalin pointed me at this glibc thread:
https://marc.info/?l=glibc-alpha&m=175811917427562
which sounds like they're not entirely on board with the new ABI.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists