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

Will
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-07-14 10:38    [W:0.075 / U:0.980 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site