Hi Palmer, Could you help move the patch into your next-tree with Kees' review added? On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 6:57 AM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 12:38:17PM +0000, guoren@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > From: Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > This enables the use of per-task stack canary values if GCC has > > support for emitting the stack canary reference relative to the > > value of tp, which holds the task struct pointer in the riscv > > kernel. > > > > After compare arm64 and x86 implementations, seems arm64's is more > > flexible and readable. The key point is how gcc get the offset of > > stack_canary from gs/el0_sp. > > > > x86: Use a fix offset from gs, not flexible. > > > > struct fixed_percpu_data { > > /* > > * GCC hardcodes the stack canary as %gs:40. Since the > > * irq_stack is the object at %gs:0, we reserve the bottom > > * 48 bytes of the irq stack for the canary. > > */ > > char gs_base[40]; // :( > > unsigned long stack_canary; > > }; > > > > arm64: Use -mstack-protector-guard-offset & guard-reg > > gcc options: > > -mstack-protector-guard=sysreg > > -mstack-protector-guard-reg=sp_el0 > > -mstack-protector-guard-offset=xxx > > > > riscv: Use -mstack-protector-guard-offset & guard-reg > > gcc options: > > -mstack-protector-guard=tls > > -mstack-protector-guard-reg=tp > > -mstack-protector-guard-offset=xxx > > > > GCC's implementation has been merged: > > commit c931e8d5a96463427040b0d11f9c4352ac22b2b0 > > Author: Cooper Qu <cooper.qu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Mon Jul 13 16:15:08 2020 +0800 > > > > RISC-V: Add support for TLS stack protector canary access > > > > In the end, these codes are inserted by gcc before return: > > > > * 0xffffffe00020b396 <+120>: ld a5,1008(tp) # 0x3f0 > > * 0xffffffe00020b39a <+124>: xor a5,a5,a4 > > * 0xffffffe00020b39c <+126>: mv a0,s5 > > * 0xffffffe00020b39e <+128>: bnez a5,0xffffffe00020b61c <_do_fork+766> > > 0xffffffe00020b3a2 <+132>: ld ra,136(sp) > > 0xffffffe00020b3a4 <+134>: ld s0,128(sp) > > 0xffffffe00020b3a6 <+136>: ld s1,120(sp) > > 0xffffffe00020b3a8 <+138>: ld s2,112(sp) > > 0xffffffe00020b3aa <+140>: ld s3,104(sp) > > 0xffffffe00020b3ac <+142>: ld s4,96(sp) > > 0xffffffe00020b3ae <+144>: ld s5,88(sp) > > 0xffffffe00020b3b0 <+146>: ld s6,80(sp) > > 0xffffffe00020b3b2 <+148>: ld s7,72(sp) > > 0xffffffe00020b3b4 <+150>: addi sp,sp,144 > > 0xffffffe00020b3b6 <+152>: ret > > ... > > * 0xffffffe00020b61c <+766>: auipc ra,0x7f8 > > * 0xffffffe00020b620 <+770>: jalr -1764(ra) # 0xffffffe000a02f38 <__stack_chk_fail> > > > > Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Thanks for getting this working! It looks good to me. :) > > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > -- > Kees Cook -- Best Regards Guo Ren ML: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/