From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7E00C433E0 for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 15:13:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A07F220658 for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 15:13:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="HjIdtSu3" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725912AbgGOPNd (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jul 2020 11:13:33 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:38337 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725854AbgGOPNc (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jul 2020 11:13:32 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1594826011; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=SLr4XU8Zt9nR4MhV7pccKhkMvz8sYtWmhpN/hWtv1I8=; b=HjIdtSu3TbqrW8Y7vX/kDOuW3LpJmfcGE/r+ZrvTwNW2f4tfVrQbYIH1n5ac3+0aO0FvD/ u3aZyyKX6VkKURVX/9+4//rb+xa4QwShSISc6dRyAzWAY7DccWBsOgZtkbEN7QfP2c3LkI 9hVnaGdaU809nEWgkxLZRpa6ukb/yI8= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-428-mZSMVSBVMIe8Af8C462YOA-1; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 11:13:08 -0400 X-MC-Unique: mZSMVSBVMIe8Af8C462YOA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C43A800597; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 15:13:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg2.str.redhat.com (ovpn-112-228.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.228]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA32379D06; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 15:13:00 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Carlos O'Donell Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , "Paul E . McKenney" , Boqun Feng , "H . Peter Anvin" , Paul Turner , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Christian Brauner , Florian Weimer Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] rseq: Introduce extensible struct rseq References: <20200714030348.6214-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 17:12:59 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Carlos O'Donell's message of "Tue, 14 Jul 2020 16:55:11 -0400") Message-ID: <87a700zu9w.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 Sender: linux-api-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-api@vger.kernel.org * Carlos O'Donell: > On 7/13/20 11:03 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: >> Recent discussion led to a solution for extending struct rseq. This is >> an implementation of the proposed solution. >> >> Now is a good time to agree on this scheme before the release of glibc >> 2.32, just in case there are small details to fix on the user-space >> side in order to allow extending struct rseq. > > Adding extensibility to the rseq registration process would be great, > but we are out of time for the glibc 2.32 release. > > Should we revert rseq for glibc 2.32 and spend quality time discussing > the implications of an extensible design, something that Google already > says they are doing? > > We can, with a clear head, and an agreed upon extension mechanism > include rseq in glibc 2.33 (release scheduled for Feburary 1st 2021). > We release time boxed every 6 months, no deviation, so you know when > your next merge window will be. > > We have already done the hard work of fixing the nesting signal > handler issues, and glibc integration. If we revert today that will > also give time for Firefox and Chrome to adjust their sandboxes. > > Do you wish to go forward with rseq as we have it in glibc 2.32, > or do you wish to revert rseq from glibc 2.32, discuss the extension > mechanism, and put it back into glibc 2.33 with adjustments? I posted the glibc revert: I do not think we have any other choice at this point. Thanks, Florian