lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] arm64: Make TSK_STACK_CANARY more accurate defined
From
Date


On 2020/7/14 下午4:37, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 04:03:33AM +0000, guoren@kernel.org wrote:
>> From: Guo Ren <guoren@linux.alibaba.com>
>>
>> TSK_STACK_CANARY only used in arm64/Makefile with
>> CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR_PER_TASK wrap. So use the same policy in
>> asm-offset.c.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@linux.alibaba.com>
>> Co-developed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c
>> index 0577e21..37d5d3d 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c
>> @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ int main(void)
>> DEFINE(TSK_TI_SCS_SP, offsetof(struct task_struct, thread_info.scs_sp));
>> #endif
>> DEFINE(TSK_STACK, offsetof(struct task_struct, stack));
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR_PER_TASK
>> DEFINE(TSK_STACK_CANARY, offsetof(struct task_struct, stack_canary));
>> #endif
> I don't think this really makese much sense. The 'stack_canary' field in
> 'struct task_struct' is defined as:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR
> /* Canary value for the -fstack-protector GCC feature: */
> unsigned long stack_canary;
> #endif
>
> so I think it makes sense to follow that in asm-offsets.c
>
> Does the current code actually cause a problem?
No, I just want to know how arm64 reply, ref:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/1594397998-10221-1-git-send-email-guoren@kernel.org/T/#t

Best Regards
 Guo Ren

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-07-14 11:33    [W:0.109 / U:0.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site