Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v14]

2022-02-02 Thread David Holmes
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 10:18:38 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote: >> And this change will keep ROP protection enabled if we fall into the "this >> VM was built without ROP-protection support.". In that case we'll be >> protecting generated code, but the VM itself won't be protected. This will >> run withou

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v19]

2022-02-02 Thread Tyler Steele
> Just in time for the holidays I have completed an implementation of the JFR > functionality for AIX. As a side note, this is my first submission to OpenJDK > 👋 > > ### Implementation notes and alternatives considered > > After modifying the build system to allow the --enable-jvm-feature-jfr t

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v18]

2022-02-02 Thread Tyler Steele
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 17:17:10 GMT, Martin Doerr wrote: > Thanks for the update. As David had written, the Oracle Copyright lines you > have added are not correct: "Copyright (c) 2022, 2022". I suggest to avoid > adding new lines for this change until the topic is clarified. Agreed. I have remove

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v18]

2022-02-02 Thread Martin Doerr
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 16:30:56 GMT, Tyler Steele wrote: >> Just in time for the holidays I have completed an implementation of the JFR >> functionality for AIX. As a side note, this is my first submission to >> OpenJDK 👋 >> >> ### Implementation notes and alternatives considered >> >> After modi

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v13]

2022-02-02 Thread Tyler Steele
On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 22:48:20 GMT, Martin Doerr wrote: >> Tyler Steele has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous >> commits have been removed. Incremental views are not available. > > src/hotspot/os_cpu/aix_ppc/thread_aix_ppc.cpp line 63: > >> 61: >> 62: if (ret_frame.pc

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v18]

2022-02-02 Thread Tyler Steele
> Just in time for the holidays I have completed an implementation of the JFR > functionality for AIX. As a side note, this is my first submission to OpenJDK > 👋 > > ### Implementation notes and alternatives considered > > After modifying the build system to allow the --enable-jvm-feature-jfr t

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v17]

2022-02-02 Thread Alan Hayward
> PAC is an optional feature in AArch64 8.3 and is compulsory in v9. One > of its uses is to protect against ROP based attacks. This is done by > signing the Link Register whenever it is stored on the stack, and > authenticating the value when it is loaded back from the stack. If an > attacker were

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v16]

2022-02-02 Thread Alan Hayward
> PAC is an optional feature in AArch64 8.3 and is compulsory in v9. One > of its uses is to protect against ROP based attacks. This is done by > signing the Link Register whenever it is stored on the stack, and > authenticating the value when it is loaded back from the stack. If an > attacker were

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v14]

2022-02-02 Thread Andrew Haley
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 09:34:20 GMT, Alan Hayward wrote: > And this change will keep ROP protection enabled if we fall into the "this VM > was built without ROP-protection support.". In that case we'll be protecting > generated code, but the VM itself won't be protected. This will run without > cr

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v14]

2022-02-02 Thread Alan Hayward
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 09:29:21 GMT, Alan Hayward wrote: >> Given that the implementation has now changed so much that it's no longer >> NOP based, I'll go with @dholmes-ora . >> One other thing, though: it might be better to say here "but this VM was >> built without ROP-protection support." That'

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v14]

2022-02-02 Thread Alan Hayward
On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 18:33:28 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote: >> But we can't honour that because it is not supported. Further, the >> suggestion in the referenced discussion seemed to be based on the assumption >> that doing so would be harmless because it is NOP based, but you have >> indicated that

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v15]

2022-02-02 Thread Alan Hayward
> PAC is an optional feature in AArch64 8.3 and is compulsory in v9. One > of its uses is to protect against ROP based attacks. This is done by > signing the Link Register whenever it is stored on the stack, and > authenticating the value when it is loaded back from the stack. If an > attacker were

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v17]

2022-02-02 Thread Martin Doerr
On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 21:36:56 GMT, Tyler Steele wrote: >> Just in time for the holidays I have completed an implementation of the JFR >> functionality for AIX. As a side note, this is my first submission to >> OpenJDK 👋 >> >> ### Implementation notes and alternatives considered >> >> After modi

Re: Segfault when building openjdk13 with openjdk12

2022-02-02 Thread Aleksey Shipilev
On 2/2/22 08:53, Abigail G wrote: Whoops, looks like I made the zip wrong, this one should work: https://0x0.st/oHxy.zip So it looks like a GC crash: # SIGSEGV (0xb) at pc=0x7fa2ba719208, pid=29539, tid=29557 siginfo: si_signo: 11 (SIGSEGV), si_code: 1 (SEGV_MAPERR), si_addr: 0x

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v17]

2022-02-02 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 21:36:56 GMT, Tyler Steele wrote: >> Just in time for the holidays I have completed an implementation of the JFR >> functionality for AIX. As a side note, this is my first submission to >> OpenJDK 👋 >> >> ### Implementation notes and alternatives considered >> >> After modi