arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Rationale:
1. Shadow stacks only store return addresses (8 bytes per entry), not
local variables, function parameters, or saved registers. A 512MB
shadow stack is far more than sufficient for any practical
application, even with extremely deep recursion. This size
maintains adequate while being more resource-efficient margin
2. On memory-constrained systems (e.g., platforms with only 4GB of
physical memory, which is a common configuration), allocating 4GB
of virtual address space for shadow stack per process/thread can
lead to virtual memory allocation failures when the overcommit mode
is set to OVERCOMMIT_GUESS or OVERCOMMIT_NEVER:
Error: "__vm_enough_memory: not enough memory for the allocation"
Suggested-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com>
---
Changed in v4:
- Fix wrong subject. It is 512MB instead of 2GB
Changed in v3:
- Remove max(). PAGE_ALIGN() already rounds up
- Change stack size to RLIMIT_STACK/8 with SZ_512M cap. Suggested by David Laight
Changed in v2:
- Add max() in case RLIMIT_STACK is smaller than PAGE_SIZE. Suggested by
Paul Walmsley and Sashiko
Changed in v1:
- Use min() instead of min_t(). Suggested by David Laight
arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
index 6eaa0d94fdfe..2036918a77db 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
@@ -109,15 +109,15 @@ void set_indir_lp_lock(struct task_struct *task, bool lock)
task->thread_info.user_cfi_state.ufcfi_locked = lock;
}
/*
- * If size is 0, then to be compatible with regular stack we want it to be as big as
- * regular stack. Else PAGE_ALIGN it and return back
+ * The shadow stack only stores the return address and not any variables
+ * 512M should be more than sufficient for most applications.
*/
static unsigned long calc_shstk_size(unsigned long size)
{
if (size)
return PAGE_ALIGN(size);
- return PAGE_ALIGN(min_t(unsigned long long, rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK), SZ_4G));
+ return PAGE_ALIGN(min(rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK) / 8, SZ_512M));
}
/*
--
2.43.7
On 5/19/26 00:18, Zong Li wrote:
> Rationale:
>
> 1. Shadow stacks only store return addresses (8 bytes per entry), not
> local variables, function parameters, or saved registers. A 512MB
> shadow stack is far more than sufficient for any practical
> application, even with extremely deep recursion. This size
> maintains adequate while being more resource-efficient margin
>
> 2. On memory-constrained systems (e.g., platforms with only 4GB of
> physical memory, which is a common configuration), allocating 4GB
> of virtual address space for shadow stack per process/thread can
> lead to virtual memory allocation failures when the overcommit mode
> is set to OVERCOMMIT_GUESS or OVERCOMMIT_NEVER:
> Error: "__vm_enough_memory: not enough memory for the allocation"
>
> Suggested-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com>
> ---
>
> Changed in v4:
> - Fix wrong subject. It is 512MB instead of 2GB
>
> Changed in v3:
> - Remove max(). PAGE_ALIGN() already rounds up
> - Change stack size to RLIMIT_STACK/8 with SZ_512M cap. Suggested by David Laight
>
> Changed in v2:
> - Add max() in case RLIMIT_STACK is smaller than PAGE_SIZE. Suggested by
> Paul Walmsley and Sashiko
>
> Changed in v1:
> - Use min() instead of min_t(). Suggested by David Laight
>
> arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> index 6eaa0d94fdfe..2036918a77db 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> @@ -109,15 +109,15 @@ void set_indir_lp_lock(struct task_struct *task, bool lock)
> task->thread_info.user_cfi_state.ufcfi_locked = lock;
> }
> /*
> - * If size is 0, then to be compatible with regular stack we want it to be as big as
> - * regular stack. Else PAGE_ALIGN it and return back
> + * The shadow stack only stores the return address and not any variables
> + * 512M should be more than sufficient for most applications.
> */
> static unsigned long calc_shstk_size(unsigned long size)
> {
> if (size)
> return PAGE_ALIGN(size);
>
> - return PAGE_ALIGN(min_t(unsigned long long, rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK), SZ_4G));
> + return PAGE_ALIGN(min(rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK) / 8, SZ_512M));
> }
>
> /*
Just FYI, your V2 version of this patch was merged in Linux 7.1-rc4 (commit 6c7674b5b7ae513cecae22aa9dcdcf533862cf5c). You need to
rebase, otherwise this patch won't apply.
On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 4:28 PM Ron Economos <re@w6rz.net> wrote:
>
> On 5/19/26 00:18, Zong Li wrote:
> > Rationale:
> >
> > 1. Shadow stacks only store return addresses (8 bytes per entry), not
> > local variables, function parameters, or saved registers. A 512MB
> > shadow stack is far more than sufficient for any practical
> > application, even with extremely deep recursion. This size
> > maintains adequate while being more resource-efficient margin
> >
> > 2. On memory-constrained systems (e.g., platforms with only 4GB of
> > physical memory, which is a common configuration), allocating 4GB
> > of virtual address space for shadow stack per process/thread can
> > lead to virtual memory allocation failures when the overcommit mode
> > is set to OVERCOMMIT_GUESS or OVERCOMMIT_NEVER:
> > Error: "__vm_enough_memory: not enough memory for the allocation"
> >
> > Suggested-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com>
> > ---
> >
> > Changed in v4:
> > - Fix wrong subject. It is 512MB instead of 2GB
> >
> > Changed in v3:
> > - Remove max(). PAGE_ALIGN() already rounds up
> > - Change stack size to RLIMIT_STACK/8 with SZ_512M cap. Suggested by David Laight
> >
> > Changed in v2:
> > - Add max() in case RLIMIT_STACK is smaller than PAGE_SIZE. Suggested by
> > Paul Walmsley and Sashiko
> >
> > Changed in v1:
> > - Use min() instead of min_t(). Suggested by David Laight
> >
> > arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c | 6 +++---
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> > index 6eaa0d94fdfe..2036918a77db 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> > @@ -109,15 +109,15 @@ void set_indir_lp_lock(struct task_struct *task, bool lock)
> > task->thread_info.user_cfi_state.ufcfi_locked = lock;
> > }
> > /*
> > - * If size is 0, then to be compatible with regular stack we want it to be as big as
> > - * regular stack. Else PAGE_ALIGN it and return back
> > + * The shadow stack only stores the return address and not any variables
> > + * 512M should be more than sufficient for most applications.
> > */
> > static unsigned long calc_shstk_size(unsigned long size)
> > {
> > if (size)
> > return PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> >
> > - return PAGE_ALIGN(min_t(unsigned long long, rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK), SZ_4G));
> > + return PAGE_ALIGN(min(rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK) / 8, SZ_512M));
> > }
> >
> > /*
>
> Just FYI, your V2 version of this patch was merged in Linux 7.1-rc4 (commit 6c7674b5b7ae513cecae22aa9dcdcf533862cf5c). You need to
> rebase, otherwise this patch won't apply.
Thank you for pointing this out. Perhaps let's drop this series and
send a new one to explain why we want to reduce the size to 512MB
>
On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 5:20 PM Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 4:28 PM Ron Economos <re@w6rz.net> wrote:
> >
> > On 5/19/26 00:18, Zong Li wrote:
> > > Rationale:
> > >
> > > 1. Shadow stacks only store return addresses (8 bytes per entry), not
> > > local variables, function parameters, or saved registers. A 512MB
> > > shadow stack is far more than sufficient for any practical
> > > application, even with extremely deep recursion. This size
> > > maintains adequate while being more resource-efficient margin
> > >
> > > 2. On memory-constrained systems (e.g., platforms with only 4GB of
> > > physical memory, which is a common configuration), allocating 4GB
> > > of virtual address space for shadow stack per process/thread can
> > > lead to virtual memory allocation failures when the overcommit mode
> > > is set to OVERCOMMIT_GUESS or OVERCOMMIT_NEVER:
> > > Error: "__vm_enough_memory: not enough memory for the allocation"
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Changed in v4:
> > > - Fix wrong subject. It is 512MB instead of 2GB
> > >
> > > Changed in v3:
> > > - Remove max(). PAGE_ALIGN() already rounds up
> > > - Change stack size to RLIMIT_STACK/8 with SZ_512M cap. Suggested by David Laight
> > >
> > > Changed in v2:
> > > - Add max() in case RLIMIT_STACK is smaller than PAGE_SIZE. Suggested by
> > > Paul Walmsley and Sashiko
> > >
> > > Changed in v1:
> > > - Use min() instead of min_t(). Suggested by David Laight
> > >
> > > arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c | 6 +++---
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> > > index 6eaa0d94fdfe..2036918a77db 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> > > @@ -109,15 +109,15 @@ void set_indir_lp_lock(struct task_struct *task, bool lock)
> > > task->thread_info.user_cfi_state.ufcfi_locked = lock;
> > > }
> > > /*
> > > - * If size is 0, then to be compatible with regular stack we want it to be as big as
> > > - * regular stack. Else PAGE_ALIGN it and return back
> > > + * The shadow stack only stores the return address and not any variables
> > > + * 512M should be more than sufficient for most applications.
> > > */
> > > static unsigned long calc_shstk_size(unsigned long size)
> > > {
> > > if (size)
> > > return PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> > >
> > > - return PAGE_ALIGN(min_t(unsigned long long, rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK), SZ_4G));
> > > + return PAGE_ALIGN(min(rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK) / 8, SZ_512M));
> > > }
> > >
> > > /*
> >
> > Just FYI, your V2 version of this patch was merged in Linux 7.1-rc4 (commit 6c7674b5b7ae513cecae22aa9dcdcf533862cf5c). You need to
> > rebase, otherwise this patch won't apply.
>
Hi David,
Since the original patch has been merged, would you like to send a new
patch from your side to adjust the size? Or do you prefer that I do
that for you? Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks
> Thank you for pointing this out. Perhaps let's drop this series and
> send a new one to explain why we want to reduce the size to 512MB
>
> >
On Wed, 20 May 2026 13:59:44 +0800
Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 5:20 PM Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 4:28 PM Ron Economos <re@w6rz.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 5/19/26 00:18, Zong Li wrote:
> > > > Rationale:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Shadow stacks only store return addresses (8 bytes per entry), not
> > > > local variables, function parameters, or saved registers. A 512MB
> > > > shadow stack is far more than sufficient for any practical
> > > > application, even with extremely deep recursion. This size
> > > > maintains adequate while being more resource-efficient margin
> > > >
> > > > 2. On memory-constrained systems (e.g., platforms with only 4GB of
> > > > physical memory, which is a common configuration), allocating 4GB
> > > > of virtual address space for shadow stack per process/thread can
> > > > lead to virtual memory allocation failures when the overcommit mode
> > > > is set to OVERCOMMIT_GUESS or OVERCOMMIT_NEVER:
> > > > Error: "__vm_enough_memory: not enough memory for the allocation"
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > Changed in v4:
> > > > - Fix wrong subject. It is 512MB instead of 2GB
> > > >
> > > > Changed in v3:
> > > > - Remove max(). PAGE_ALIGN() already rounds up
> > > > - Change stack size to RLIMIT_STACK/8 with SZ_512M cap. Suggested by David Laight
> > > >
> > > > Changed in v2:
> > > > - Add max() in case RLIMIT_STACK is smaller than PAGE_SIZE. Suggested by
> > > > Paul Walmsley and Sashiko
> > > >
> > > > Changed in v1:
> > > > - Use min() instead of min_t(). Suggested by David Laight
> > > >
> > > > arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c | 6 +++---
> > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> > > > index 6eaa0d94fdfe..2036918a77db 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/usercfi.c
> > > > @@ -109,15 +109,15 @@ void set_indir_lp_lock(struct task_struct *task, bool lock)
> > > > task->thread_info.user_cfi_state.ufcfi_locked = lock;
> > > > }
> > > > /*
> > > > - * If size is 0, then to be compatible with regular stack we want it to be as big as
> > > > - * regular stack. Else PAGE_ALIGN it and return back
> > > > + * The shadow stack only stores the return address and not any variables
> > > > + * 512M should be more than sufficient for most applications.
> > > > */
> > > > static unsigned long calc_shstk_size(unsigned long size)
> > > > {
> > > > if (size)
> > > > return PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> > > >
> > > > - return PAGE_ALIGN(min_t(unsigned long long, rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK), SZ_4G));
> > > > + return PAGE_ALIGN(min(rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK) / 8, SZ_512M));
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > >
> > > Just FYI, your V2 version of this patch was merged in Linux 7.1-rc4 (commit 6c7674b5b7ae513cecae22aa9dcdcf533862cf5c). You need to
> > > rebase, otherwise this patch won't apply.
> >
>
> Hi David,
> Since the original patch has been merged, would you like to send a new
> patch from your side to adjust the size? Or do you prefer that I do
> that for you? Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks
It's is probably easier for you to do it.
I'd need to find a clean enough source tree.
(I've got a part-committed set of changes to remove strcpy() from
150 files 'in progress'.)
-- David
>
> > Thank you for pointing this out. Perhaps let's drop this series and
> > send a new one to explain why we want to reduce the size to 512MB
> >
> > >
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.