[PATCH v3 21/36] arm64/mm: Implement map_shadow_stack()
Mark Brown
broonie at kernel.org
Tue Aug 8 13:42:20 PDT 2023
On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 09:21:03AM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> The 08/07/2023 14:00, Mark Brown wrote:
> > That's not what the manual page or a quick check of the code suggest
> > that mmap() does, they say that the kernel just takes it as a hint and
> i should have said that i expect MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE semantics
> (since the x86 code seemed to use that) and then the mapped
> address must match exactly thus page aligned.
Ah, I see. We do pass MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE when allocating the stack if
an address was specified but currently leave it up to the VM subsystem
to figure out what to do with the address. I don't immediately see
where mmap() enforces this requirement, but I have to admit I didn't
look overly hard. I don't see a problem with enforcing a PAGE_SIZE
constraint here.
> > > > + if (size == 16 || size % 16)
> > > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > why %16 and not %8 ?
> > I don't think that's needed any more - there was some stuff in an
> > earlier version of the code but no longer.
> it's kind of important to know the exact logic so the cap token
> location can be computed in userspace for arbitrary size.
> (this is why i wanted to see the map_shadow_stack man page first
> but i was told that comes separately on linux..)
Right, I'd already changed it to % 8 in the version I posted yesterday.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-riscv/attachments/20230808/cce101d4/attachment.sig>
More information about the linux-riscv
mailing list