[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f9a92cc8-7887-4cb3-93fc-56762a13e917@163.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 10:30:00 +0800
From: Da Xie <xxie_xd@....com>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Future plans for RISC-V Zicfiss/Zicfilp support?
On 11/13/25 21:36, Rich Felker wrote:
> 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
Understood. Thank you for the explanation.
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.
