On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 11:43:49AM -0800, Deepak Gupta wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 5:37 AM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 04:50:38PM -0800, Deepak Gupta wrote: > > > How will it do that (currently _ENABLE is married to _WRITE and _PUSH) ? > > That's feeling moderately firmly into "don't do that" territory to be > > honest, the problems of trying to modify the stack of another running > > thread while it's active just don't seem worth it - if you're > > coordinating enough to do the modifications it's probably possible to > > just ask the thread who's stack is being modified to do the modification > > itself and having an unprotected thread writing into shadow stack memory > > doesn't feel great. > Yeah no leanings on my side. Just wanted to articulate this scenario. > Since this is new ground, > we can define what's appropriate. Let's keep it this way where a > thread can write to shadow > stack mappings only when it itself has shadow stack enabled. Sounds good to me - it's much easier to relax permissions later than to tighten them up.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
