From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
peterz@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lkdtm: cfi: add test for HW landing pad CFI
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 13:06:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YtAGzqfT9EkYTFBm@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Ys/+qghGmH4kK4DN@FVFF77S0Q05N>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 942 bytes --]
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 12:31:54PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 05:13:57PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Not sure that worrying about that at this point isn't making perfect the
> > enemy of good though, it could be dealt with later. Perhaps just put
> > the offset behind a #define to make it a tiny bit more discoverable?
> How about I just add a comment for now? e.g.
> /*
> * Skip past a landing pad instruction.
> * On arm64 all instructions are 4-byte aligned, and x86's ENDBR is 4
> * bytes.
> */
I'd rather have something that will definitely either fail or skip the
test so it can't silently pass, if people need to look at the source to
discover this there's more chance they'll mistakenly think things are
working. Something like
#ifdef __aarch64__
#define LANDING_PAD_SKIP 4
#elif defined (__x86_64__)
#define LANDING_PAD_SKIP 4
#endif
then #ifdef LANDING_PAD_SKIP around the test perhaps?
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-14 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-13 15:18 [PATCH] lkdtm: cfi: add test for HW landing pad CFI Mark Rutland
2022-07-13 16:13 ` Mark Brown
2022-07-14 11:31 ` Mark Rutland
2022-07-14 12:06 ` Mark Brown [this message]
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=YtAGzqfT9EkYTFBm@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox