From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Julien Thierry <jthierry@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/17] objtool: add base support for arm64
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 15:15:12 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bebccb15-1195-c004-923e-74d8444250e1@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210122174342.GG6391@sirena.org.uk>
On 1/22/21 11:43 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:54:52PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
>> 2) The shadow stack idea sounds promising -- how hard would it be to
>> make a prototype reliable unwinder?
>
> In theory it doesn't look too hard and I can't see a particular reason
> not to try doing this - there's going to be edge cases but hopefully for
> reliable stack trace they're all in areas where we would be happy to
> just decide the stack isn't reliable anyway, things like nesting which
> allocates separate shadow stacks for each nested level for example.
> I'll take a look.
>
I am a new comer to this discussion and I am learning. Just have some
questions. Pardon me if they are obvious or if they have already been
asked and answered.
Doesn't Clang already have support for a shadow stack implementation for ARM64?
We could take a look at how Clang does it.
Will there not be a significant performance hit? May be, some of it can be
mitigated by using a parallel shadow stack rather than a compact one.
Are there any longjmp style situations in the kernel where the stack is
unwound by several frames? In these cases, the shadow stack must be unwound
accordingly.
Madhavan
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-22 21:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-20 17:37 [RFC PATCH 00/17] objtool: add base support for arm64 Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 01/17] tools: Add some generic functions and headers Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 02/17] tools: arm64: Make aarch64 instruction decoder available to tools Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 03/17] tools: bug: Remove duplicate definition Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 04/17] objtool: arm64: Add base definition for arm64 backend Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 05/17] objtool: arm64: Decode add/sub instructions Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 06/17] objtool: arm64: Decode jump and call related instructions Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 07/17] objtool: arm64: Decode other system instructions Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 08/17] objtool: arm64: Decode load/store instructions Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 09/17] objtool: arm64: Decode LDR instructions Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 10/17] objtool: arm64: Accept padding in code sections Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 11/17] efi: libstub: Ignore relocations for .discard sections Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 12/17] gcc-plugins: objtool: Add plugin to detect switch table on arm64 Julien Thierry
2021-01-27 22:15 ` Nick Desaulniers
2021-01-27 23:26 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-01-29 18:10 ` Nick Desaulniers
2021-02-01 21:44 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-02-01 23:17 ` Nick Desaulniers
2021-02-02 0:02 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-02-02 14:24 ` David Laight
2021-02-02 22:33 ` Nick Desaulniers
2021-02-02 23:36 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-02-02 23:52 ` Nick Desaulniers
2021-02-02 8:57 ` Julien Thierry
2021-02-02 23:01 ` Nick Desaulniers
2021-02-03 0:14 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-02-03 11:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-03 13:04 ` Mark Brown
2021-02-03 13:58 ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-03 8:11 ` Julien Thierry
2021-02-09 16:30 ` Daniel Kiss
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 13/17] objtool: arm64: Implement functions to add switch tables alternatives Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 14/17] objtool: arm64: Cache section with switch table information Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 15/17] objtool: arm64: Handle supported relocations in alternatives Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:37 ` [RFC PATCH 16/17] objtool: arm64: Ignore replacement section for alternative callback Julien Thierry
2021-01-20 17:38 ` [RFC PATCH 17/17] objtool: arm64: Enable stack validation for arm64 Julien Thierry
2021-01-21 9:03 ` [RFC PATCH 00/17] objtool: add base support " Ard Biesheuvel
2021-01-21 10:26 ` Julien Thierry
2021-01-21 11:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-01-21 11:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-01-21 11:48 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-01-21 18:54 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-01-22 17:43 ` Mark Brown
2021-01-22 17:54 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-01-28 22:10 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-01-29 15:47 ` Mark Brown
2021-01-22 21:15 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman [this message]
2021-01-22 21:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-01-22 21:44 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-01-25 21:19 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-01-22 21:16 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-01-21 13:23 ` Julien Thierry
2021-01-21 14:23 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bebccb15-1195-c004-923e-74d8444250e1@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=jthierry@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).