On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 07:22:21PM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-02-21 at 14:06 -0500, dalias@libc.org wrote:

> > It's fine to turn RDSSP into an actual emulated read of the SSP, or
> > at
> > least an emulated load of zero so that uninitialized data is not left
> > in the target register.

> We can't intercept RDSSP, but it becomes a NOP by default. (disclaimer
> x86-only knowledge).

For arm64 we have a separate control GCSCRE0_EL1.nTR for access to
GCSPR_EL0 (our SSP equivalent) we can use.

> > I have not looked at all the instructions that become #UD but I
> > suspect they all have reasonable trivial ways to implement a
> > "disabled" version of them that userspace can act upon reasonably.

> This would have to be thought through functionally and performance
> wise. I'm not opposed if can come up with a fully fleshed out plan. How
> serious are you in pursuing musl support, if we had something like
> this?

Same here, we have to be careful since it's defining ABI in a way that
we don't normally provide ABI but if there's a clear case for doing it
then...