[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 15:44:39 -0800
From: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/17] arm64: disable function graph tracing with SCS
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 9:11 AM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
> Can you please elaborate on _how_ this is incompatible in the commit
> message?
>
> For example, it's not clear to me if you mean that's functionally
> incompatible, or if you're trying to remove return-altering gadgets.
>
> If there's a functional incompatibility, please spell that out a bit
> more clearly. Likewise if this is about minimizing the set of places
> that can mess with control-flow outside of usual function conventions.
Sure, I'll add a better description in v5. In this case, the return
address is modified in the kernel stack, which means the changes are
ignored with SCS.
Sami
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
