On 1/27/21 1:25 PM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> @@ -135,6 +135,8 @@ enum xfeature {
> #define XFEATURE_MASK_PT (1 << XFEATURE_PT_UNIMPLEMENTED_SO_FAR)
> #define XFEATURE_MASK_PKRU (1 << XFEATURE_PKRU)
> #define XFEATURE_MASK_PASID (1 << XFEATURE_PASID)
> +#define XFEATURE_MASK_CET_USER (1 << XFEATURE_CET_USER)
> +#define XFEATURE_MASK_CET_KERNEL (1 << XFEATURE_CET_KERNEL)
> #define XFEATURE_MASK_LBR (1 << XFEATURE_LBR)
>
> #define XFEATURE_MASK_FPSSE (XFEATURE_MASK_FP | XFEATURE_MASK_SSE)
> @@ -237,6 +239,23 @@ struct pkru_state {
> u32 pad;
> } __packed;
>
> +/*
> + * State component 11 is Control-flow Enforcement user states
> + */
> +struct cet_user_state {
> + u64 user_cet; /* user control-flow settings */
> + u64 user_ssp; /* user shadow stack pointer */
> +};
Andy Cooper just mentioned on IRC about this nugget in the spec:
XRSTORS on CET state will do reserved bit and canonicality
checks on the state in similar manner as done by the WRMSR to
these state elements.
We're using copy_kernel_to_xregs_err(), so the #GP *should* be OK.
Could we prove this out in practice, please?
