Re: [PATCH 1/4] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at C startup and thread creation (v7)

[Carlos O'Donell <codonell at redhat dot com>]

On 4/8/19 3:20 PM, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho wrote:
> Carlos O'Donell <codonell@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > On 4/5/19 5:16 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > * Carlos O'Donell:
> > > > It is valuable that it be a trap, particularly for constant pools because
> > > > it means that a jump into the constant pool will trap.
> > >
> > > Sorry, I don't understand why this matters in this context.  Would you
> > > please elaborate?
> >
> > Sorry, I wasn't very clear.
> >
> > My point is only that any accidental jumps, either with off-by-one (like you
> > fixed in gcc/glibc's signal unwinding most recently), result in a process fault
> > rather than executing RSEQ_SIG as a valid instruction *and then* continuing
> > onwards to the handler.
> >
> > A process fault is achieved either by a trap, or an invalid instruction, or
> > a privileged insn (like suggested for MIPS in this thread).
>
> In that case, mtmsr (Move to Machine State Register) seems a good candidate.
>
> mtmsr is available both on 32 and 64 bits since their first implementations.
>
> It's a privileged instruction and should never appear in userspace
> code (causes SIGILL).
>
> Any comments?
 
That seems good to me.

Mathieu,

What's required to move this forward for POWER?

--
Cheers,
Carlos.