Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <1528988176.13101.15.camel@2b52.sc.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] Control Flow Enforcement - Part (3)
From:   Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
To:     Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
        Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@intel.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Jun 2018 07:56:16 -0700
In-Reply-To: <814fc15e80908d8630ff665be690ccbe6e69be88.camel@gmail.com>
References: <20180607143807.3611-1-yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
         <bbfde1b3-5e1b-80e3-30e8-fd1e46a2ceb1@gmail.com>
         <1528815820.8271.16.camel@2b52.sc.intel.com>
         <814fc15e80908d8630ff665be690ccbe6e69be88.camel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2018-06-14 at 11:07 +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 08:03 -0700, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> > On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 20:56 +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 08/06/18 00:37, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> > > > This series introduces CET - Shadow stack
> > > > 
> > > > At the high level, shadow stack is:
> > > > 
> > > > 	Allocated from a task's address space with vm_flags VM_SHSTK;
> > > > 	Its PTEs must be read-only and dirty;
> > > > 	Fixed sized, but the default size can be changed by sys admin.
> > > > 
> > > > For a forked child, the shadow stack is duplicated when the next
> > > > shadow stack access takes place.
> > > > 
> > > > For a pthread child, a new shadow stack is allocated.
> > > > 
> > > > The signal handler uses the same shadow stack as the main program.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Even with sigaltstack()?
> > > 
> > Yes.
> 
> I am not convinced that it would work, as we switch stacks, oveflow might
> be an issue. I also forgot to bring up setcontext(2), I presume those
> will get new shadow stacks

Do you mean signal stack/sigaltstack overflow or swapcontext in a signal
handler?

Yu-cheng