linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 8/9] x86-64: Emulate legacy vsyscalls

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 7 Jun 2011 19:49:02 -0400
From:	Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
To:	pageexec@...email.hu
Cc:	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	x86@...nel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>,
	richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
	Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@...labs.com>,
	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 8/9] x86-64: Emulate legacy vsyscalls

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:32 PM,  <pageexec@...email.hu> wrote:
>> > do you know what that mucking looks like? ;) prepare for the most complex code
>> > you've ever seen (it's in __bad_area_nosemaphore):
>> >
>> >  779 #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>> >  780 »·······if (mm && (error_code & PF_INSTR) && mm->context.vdso) {
>> >  781 »·······»·······if (regs->ip == (unsigned long)vgettimeofday) {
>> >  782 »·······»·······»·······regs->ip = (unsigned long)VDSO64_SYMBOL(mm->context.vdso, gettimeofday);
>> >  783 »·······»·······»·······return;
>> >  784 »·······»·······} else if (regs->ip == (unsigned long)vtime) {
>> >  785 »·······»·······»·······regs->ip = (unsigned long)VDSO64_SYMBOL(mm->context.vdso, clock_gettime);
>> >  786 »·······»·······»·······return;
>> >  787 »·······»·······} else if (regs->ip == (unsigned long)vgetcpu) {
>> >  788 »·······»·······»·······regs->ip = (unsigned long)VDSO64_SYMBOL(mm->context.vdso, getcpu);
>> >  789 »·······»·······»·······return;
>> >  790 »·······»·······}
>> >  791 »·······}
>> >  792 #endif
>>
>> I like this approach, however since we're already in the kernel it
>> makes sense just to run the normal syscall instead of redirecting to
>> the vdso.
>
> it's not that simple as the page fault occurs not at the actual syscall
> insn but at the first insn of the given vsyscall function, so you'd have
> to emulate it carefully to be able to return back the original caller in
> userland.
>
>

My patch (the version that's in tip/x86/vdso) more-or-less does that.
It's something like six lines of code, including error handling.

__bad_area_nosemaphore is not a fast path, and in fact I tried that
for the very first version of this code that I wrote.  My recollection
is that it's noticeably slower than int 0xcc because it has to go
through the whole VMA lookup.

If you want to submit a patch to switch from int 0xcc to
__bad_area_nosemaphore, be my guest :)  It will have almost no effect
on the complexity of the code, and, in fact, you'll probably get a net
deletion of lines because you can remove all the crud in vmlinux.lds.S
and some of the mapping code in vsyscall_64.c.

--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/