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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E28ADC433EF for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:06:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1A892086D for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 15:06:55 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A1A892086D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934406AbeFLPGx (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2018 11:06:53 -0400 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:23629 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933363AbeFLPGt (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2018 11:06:49 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga007.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.52]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Jun 2018 08:06:49 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,215,1526367600"; d="scan'208";a="46547133" Received: from 2b52.sc.intel.com (HELO [143.183.136.147]) ([143.183.136.147]) by fmsmga007.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Jun 2018 08:06:48 -0700 Message-ID: <1528815820.8271.16.camel@2b52.sc.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] Control Flow Enforcement - Part (3) From: Yu-cheng Yu To: Balbir Singh 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" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H.J. Lu" , Vedvyas Shanbhogue , "Ravi V. Shankar" , Dave Hansen , Andy Lutomirski , Jonathan Corbet , Oleg Nesterov , Arnd Bergmann , Mike Kravetz Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 08:03:40 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <20180607143807.3611-1-yu-cheng.yu@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4-0ubuntu2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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()? > > > Balbir Singh. Yes.