Re: [PATCH v18 24/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 1/29/2021 10:56 AM, Yu, Yu-cheng wrote:
On 1/29/2021 9:07 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 1/27/21 1:25 PM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
arch_prctl(ARCH_X86_CET_STATUS, u64 *args)
     Get CET feature status.

     The parameter 'args' is a pointer to a user buffer.  The kernel returns
     the following information:

     *args = shadow stack/IBT status
     *(args + 1) = shadow stack base address
     *(args + 2) = shadow stack size

[...]

+int prctl_cet(int option, u64 arg2)
+{
+    struct cet_status *cet;
+    unsigned int features;
+
+    /*
+     * GLIBC's ENOTSUPP == EOPNOTSUPP == 95, and it does not recognize
+     * the kernel's ENOTSUPP (524).  So return EOPNOTSUPP here.
+     */
+    if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_CET))
+        return -EOPNOTSUPP;

Let's ignore glibc for a moment.  What error code *should* the kernel be
returning here?  errno(3) says:

        EOPNOTSUPP      Operation not supported on socket (POSIX.1)
...
        ENOTSUP         Operation not supported (POSIX.1)


Yeah, other places in kernel use ENOTSUPP.  This seems to be out of line.  And since the issue is long-existing, applications already know how to deal with it.  I should have made that argument.  Change it to ENOTSUPP.

When I make the change, checkpatch says...

WARNING: ENOTSUPP is not a SUSV4 error code, prefer EOPNOTSUPP
#128: FILE: arch/x86/kernel/cet_prctl.c:33:
+		return -ENOTSUPP;

Do we want to reconsider?

[...]



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux