[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251113133647.GM1827@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 08:36:47 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: Da Xie <xxie_xd@....com>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Future plans for RISC-V Zicfiss/Zicfilp support?
On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 05:19:08PM +0800, Da Xie wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm new to the musl community and was exploring its support for RISC-V.
>
> I was wondering if there are any plans to support the Zicfiss (shadow
> stack) and/or Zicfilp (landing pads) extensions in the future. I
> understand these are relatively new extensions aimed at improving
> security (similar in spirit to Arm's GCS).
Plans, no, and probably not. We have not supported similar things for
other architectures because they break existing API contracts about
how the stack can be used and make it impossible to free resources or
make promises not to enter unrecoverable late-failure situations, and
because the idea of playing whack-a-mole with gadgets when you have
functions like system() present as valid call targets anyway seems
like very misplaced hardening effort in terms of cost vs benefits.
If there's some way it can work in a non-contract-breaking way,
supporting it could be on the table eventually, but it's up to folks
who want it to explain convincingly how that could work.
Rich
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.
