Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-200813-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 15:29:41 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Cc: Jamie.Cunliffe@arm.com, a.hindborg@samsung.com, alex.gaynor@gmail.com,
	ardb@kernel.org, benno.lossin@proton.me, bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com,
	boqun.feng@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	gary@garyguo.net, keescook@chromium.org, kernel@valentinobst.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
	masahiroy@kernel.org, maz@kernel.org,
	miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com, nathan@kernel.org,
	ndesaulniers@google.com, nicolas@fjasle.eu, ojeda@kernel.org,
	rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, samitolvanen@google.com,
	wedsonaf@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rust: add flags for shadow call stack sanitizer
Message-ID: <20240604142941.GD20384@willie-the-truck>
References: <20240409103120.GA22557@willie-the-truck>
 <20240430110925.1064685-1-aliceryhl@google.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240430110925.1064685-1-aliceryhl@google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)

On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 11:09:25AM +0000, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 01:14:19PM +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> >> Otherwise partially reverting to the `target.json` approach sounds good too.
> >> 
> >> I added the `-Zuse-sync-unwind=n` to the list at
> >> https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/2. Given the default is
> >> what we want, I have put it in the "Good to have" section.
> > 
> > I think we have time to do this properly, like we did for the clang
> > enablement a few years ago. In hindsight, avoiding hacks for the early
> > toolchains back then was a really good idea because it meant we could
> > rely on a solid baseline set of compiler features from the start.
> > 
> > So, please can we fix this in rustc and just have SCS dependent on that?
> 
> Just to keep you in the loop, I've posted a PR to make rustc recognize
> the reserve-x18 target feature, so that the -Ctarget-feature=+reserve-x18
> flag stops emitting a warning.
> 
> This should be sufficient for adding support for CONFIG_DYNAMIC_SCS.
> 
> You can find it here:
> https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124323
> 
> As for non-dynamic SCS, I plan to tackle that after the PR is merged.
> See the "Future possibilities" section in the linked PR for more info on
> that.

Thanks for persevering with this, Alice. I read the pull request above,
but it looks like you went with:

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124655

instead, which was merged (hurrah!). Do we need anything else?

Will