On Tue, Oct 3, 2023, at 18:35, Sohil Mehta wrote:
On 9/14/2023 11:58 AM, Sohil Mehta wrote:
commit c35559f94ebc ("x86/shstk: Introduce map_shadow_stack syscall")
recently added support for map_shadow_stack() but it is limited to x86
only for now. There is a possibility that other architectures (namely,
arm64 and RISC-V), that are implementing equivalent support for shadow
stacks, might need to add support for it.
Independent of that, reserving arch-specific syscall numbers in the
syscall tables of all architectures is good practice and would help
avoid future conflicts. map_shadow_stack() is marked as a conditional
syscall in sys_ni.c. Adding it to the syscall tables of other
architectures is harmless and would return ENOSYS when exercised.
Note, map_shadow_stack() was assigned #453 during the merge process
since #452 was taken by fchmodat2().
For Powerpc, map it to sys_ni_syscall() as is the norm for Powerpc
syscall tables.
For Alpha, map_shadow_stack() takes up #563 as Alpha still diverges from
the common syscall numbering system in the other architectures.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230515212255.GA562920@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/b402b80b-a7c6-4ef0-b977-c0f5f582b78a@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Signed-off-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@xxxxxxxxx>
---
Gentle ping...
Are there any additional comments? It applies cleanly on 6.6-rc4.
Or does it seem ready to be merged? It has the following
acknowledgements until now:
Reviewed-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@xxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (powerpc)
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
If you like, I can pick this up for 6.7 through the asm-generic
tree. If you think this should be part of 6.6, I would suggest
to merge it through the tree that originally contained the
syscall code.
Arnd
