Shadow stack command to host related subcommands (was Re: Shadow stack backtrace command name)
Thiago Jung Bauermann via Gdb <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gdb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hello again, This isn't about backtrace, but still related to your proposal I think. "Schimpe, Christina via Gdb" <[email protected]> writes: > It is configurable using "print symbol-filename" and COUNT. > The command can be called by the following names: > - "info shadow-stack bt", "info shadow-stack backtrace" > > From my perspective, the command name has the following pros and cons: > (+) Easy to understand by just looking at the command name. > (-) Rather long syntax As I mentioned yesterday, I like the "bt -shadow" proposal but I'd also like to have an "info shadow-stack" command (or just "shadow-stack" as suggested by Guinevere) to hang a couple of GCS subcommands onto, e.g.: info shadow-stack enabled info shadow-stack locked which would get/set the GCS features that are enabled or locked. These correspond to a couple of entries in the structure returned by ptrace's NT_ARM_GCS regset in Linux: struct user_gcs { uint64_t features_enabled; uint64_t features_locked; uint64_t gcspr_el0; }; Initially I thought of exposing them as pseudo-registers, but this way seems more straightforward. What do you think? Would this be useful for Intel CET as well? -- Thiago