Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm: Care about shadow stack guard gap when getting an unmapped area

Lorenzo Stoakes <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.ports.ppc64.devel,gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel,gmane.linux.ports.alpha,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.kernel.arc,gmane.linux.ports.parisc,gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel,gmane.linux.ports.sparc,gmane.linux.kernel.mm
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 07:20:02PM GMT, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 06:49:46PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 08:08:15PM GMT, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > On x86 there is a custom arch_get_unmapped_area() which was updated by the
> > > above commit to cover this case by specifying a start_gap for allocations
> > > with VM_SHADOW_STACK. Both arm64 and RISC-V have equivalent features and
> > > use the generic implementation of arch_get_unmapped_area() so let's make
> > > the equivalent change there so they also don't get shadow stack pages
> > > placed without guard pages.
>
> > Don't you need to unwind that change in x86 now you're doing it in generic code?
>
> No, x86 had a preexisting custom implementation for some other reason
> (hence the "updated by the above commit" part above) - the shadow stack
> support would most likely have been added in the core in the first place
> were it not for that.

Oh yeah missed that!

Other than comment nice-to-have this seems fine:

Acked-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <[email protected]>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.