This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: V4 [PATCH 04/12] x86/CET: Extend arch_prctl syscall for CET control
- From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey dot senozhatsky at gmail dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey dot senozhatsky dot work at gmail dot com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey dot senozhatsky at gmail dot com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 21:36:06 +0900
- Subject: Re: V4 [PATCH 04/12] x86/CET: Extend arch_prctl syscall for CET control
- References: <CAMe9rOqKkgBp7PN9m-L7-r33brXO+Eu_=-7n74B=nS9FEujJhQ@mail.gmail.com> <20180813045118.GA1193@jagdpanzerIV> <7d236db3-aaa5-3d94-73ac-2ba368ad19ec@redhat.com>
On (08/13/18 13:10), Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 08/13/2018 06:51 AM, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > [ 8.864561] process: tty: Unsupported common prctl 3001
> > [ 8.865664] expr: Unsupported prctl 3001
> > [..]
> >
> > Which is, maybe fine, though I'm not entirely sure since I don't
> > really see ARCH_CET being supported by any arch (neither in linux-next
> > nor in Linus' tree), so maybe as of now those syscalls are unneeded.
>
> Which kernel version is that? The above looks like a kernel bug because
> there doesn't seem to be any rate limiting.
Oh, my bad. Sorry, I should have mentioned that it was my own kernel
modification just to see how often I get -EINVAL prctl syscalls.
> > The part where, I believe, these -EINVAL prctls begin to backfire is
> > valgrind - I can't run it anymore with glibc 2.28. It gives me the
> > following error:
>
> valgrind has already been fixed:
>
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=396887
Nice, thanks for the info!
The fact that there are so many -EINVAL syscalls is still a bit
misleading, tho.
-ss