From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
To: "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"shuah@kernel.org" <shuah@kernel.org>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
"tglx@kernel.org" <tglx@kernel.org>,
"bill.roberts@arm.com" <bill.roberts@arm.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftest/x86: test ARCH_SHSTK_UNLOCK
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2026 21:57:18 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a16de9370b4ff397c4f006b402afad353e28f4bf.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260615195156.257950-2-bill.roberts@arm.com>
On Mon, 2026-06-15 at 14:51 -0500, Bill Roberts wrote:
> + /* test that we can't use unlock to set shadow stack */
> + if (!ARCH_PRCTL(ARCH_SHSTK_UNLOCK, ARCH_SHSTK_SHSTK)) {
> + printf("[SKIP]\tCould enable Shadow stack via UNLOCK\n");
Should it be a FAIL? And if this path is taken the test will crash because
shadow stack got accidentally enabled and we can't return from this function. It
can "goto out" and disable shadow stack before returning.
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + printf("[OK]\tCouldn't enable Shadow stack via UNLOCK\n");
> +
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-29 21:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-15 19:51 [PATCH 1/2] arch/x86: do not allow unlock to set bits Bill Roberts
2026-06-15 19:51 ` [PATCH 2/2] selftest/x86: test ARCH_SHSTK_UNLOCK Bill Roberts
2026-06-29 21:46 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-06-29 17:09 ` Bill Roberts
2026-06-30 17:02 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-06-29 21:57 ` Edgecombe, Rick P [this message]
2026-06-29 17:13 ` Bill Roberts
2026-06-29 21:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] arch/x86: do not allow unlock to set bits Edgecombe, Rick P
2026-06-29 17:05 ` Bill Roberts
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a16de9370b4ff397c4f006b402afad353e28f4bf.camel@intel.com \
--to=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=bill.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.