Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-189037-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 12:11:22 -0700
From: Deepak Gupta <debug@rivosinc.com>
To: Andy Chiu <andy.chiu@sifive.com>
Cc: paul.walmsley@sifive.com, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com,
	broonie@kernel.org, Szabolcs.Nagy@arm.com, kito.cheng@sifive.com,
	keescook@chromium.org, ajones@ventanamicro.com,
	conor.dooley@microchip.com, cleger@rivosinc.com,
	atishp@atishpatra.org, alex@ghiti.fr, bjorn@rivosinc.com,
	alexghiti@rivosinc.com, samuel.holland@sifive.com, conor@kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, palmer@dabbelt.com,
	aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, oleg@redhat.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, arnd@arndb.de, ebiederm@xmission.com,
	Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, vbabka@suse.cz, lstoakes@gmail.com,
	shuah@kernel.org, brauner@kernel.org, jerry.shih@sifive.com,
	hankuan.chen@sifive.com, greentime.hu@sifive.com, evan@rivosinc.com,
	xiao.w.wang@intel.com, charlie@rivosinc.com,
	apatel@ventanamicro.com, mchitale@ventanamicro.com,
	dbarboza@ventanamicro.com, sameo@rivosinc.com,
	shikemeng@huaweicloud.com, willy@infradead.org,
	vincent.chen@sifive.com, guoren@kernel.org, samitolvanen@google.com,
	songshuaishuai@tinylab.org, gerg@kernel.org, heiko@sntech.de,
	bhe@redhat.com, jeeheng.sia@starfivetech.com, cyy@cyyself.name,
	maskray@google.com, ancientmodern4@gmail.com,
	mathis.salmen@matsal.de, cuiyunhui@bytedance.com,
	bgray@linux.ibm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, baruch@tkos.co.il,
	alx@kernel.org, david@redhat.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	revest@chromium.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, shr@devkernel.io,
	deller@gmx.de, omosnace@redhat.com, ojeda@kernel.org,
	jhubbard@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 22/29] riscv sigcontext: adding cfi state field in
 sigcontext
Message-ID: <ZlDmWoo6EVZ1MKbN@debug.ba.rivosinc.com>
References: <20240403234054.2020347-1-debug@rivosinc.com>
 <20240403234054.2020347-23-debug@rivosinc.com>
 <CABgGipW4ZTFLh1dkiRuWD0WP4RRkfhyFCc+RsUjCD2EkA5GhSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CABgGipW4ZTFLh1dkiRuWD0WP4RRkfhyFCc+RsUjCD2EkA5GhSQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 05:46:16PM +0800, Andy Chiu wrote:
>Hi Deepak,
>
>On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 7:42 AM Deepak Gupta <debug@rivosinc.com> wrote:
>>
>> Shadow stack needs to be saved and restored on signal delivery and signal
>> return.
>>
>> sigcontext embedded in ucontext is extendible. Adding cfi state in there
>> which can be used to save cfi state before signal delivery and restore
>> cfi state on sigreturn
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Deepak Gupta <debug@rivosinc.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/sigcontext.h | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/sigcontext.h b/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/sigcontext.h
>> index cd4f175dc837..5ccdd94a0855 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/sigcontext.h
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/sigcontext.h
>> @@ -21,6 +21,10 @@ struct __sc_riscv_v_state {
>>         struct __riscv_v_ext_state v_state;
>>  } __attribute__((aligned(16)));
>>
>> +struct __sc_riscv_cfi_state {
>> +       unsigned long ss_ptr;   /* shadow stack pointer */
>> +       unsigned long rsvd;             /* keeping another word reserved in case we need it */
>> +};
>>  /*
>>   * Signal context structure
>>   *
>> @@ -29,6 +33,7 @@ struct __sc_riscv_v_state {
>>   */
>>  struct sigcontext {
>>         struct user_regs_struct sc_regs;
>> +       struct __sc_riscv_cfi_state sc_cfi_state;
>
>I am concerned about this change as this could potentially break uabi.
>Let's say there is a pre-CFI program running on this kernel. It
>receives a signal so the kernel lays out the sig-stack as presented in
>this structure. If the program accesses sc_fpregs, it would now get
>sc_cfi_state. As the offset has changed, and the pre-CFI program has
>not been re-compiled.

Yeah this is a problem if program was built with older kernel/old toolchain
(or cfi unaware toolchain). Thanks.

>
>>         union {
>>                 union __riscv_fp_state sc_fpregs;
>>                 struct __riscv_extra_ext_header sc_extdesc;
>> --
>> 2.43.2
>>
>
>There may be two ways to deal with this. One is to use a different
>signal ABI for CFI-enabled programs. This may complicate the user
>space because new programs will have to determine whether it should
>use the CFI-ABI at run time. Another way is to follow what Vector does
>for signal stack. It adds a way to introduce new extensions on signal
>stack without impacting ABI.
>
>Please let me know if I misunderstand anything, thanks.

I think following how vector does would be cleaner.
Let me munch on this a little bit.

>
>Cheers,
>Andy