linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/39] x86/entry/32: Unshare NMI return path

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:   Thu, 12 Jul 2018 13:53:19 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:     Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
        Eduardo Valentin <eduval@...zon.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, aliguori@...zon.com,
        daniel.gruss@...k.tugraz.at, hughd@...gle.com, keescook@...gle.com,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        "David H . Gutteridge" <dhgutteridge@...patico.ca>, jroedel@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/39] x86/entry/32: Unshare NMI return path



> On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:29 AM, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org> wrote:
> 
> From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
> 
> NMI will no longer use most of the shared return path,
> because NMI needs special handling when the CR3 switches for
> PTI are added.

Why?  What would go wrong?

How many return-to-usermode paths will we have?  64-bit has only one.

> This patch prepares for that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
> ---
> arch/x86/entry/entry_32.S | 8 ++++++--
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/entry_32.S b/arch/x86/entry/entry_32.S
> index d35a69a..571209e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/entry/entry_32.S
> +++ b/arch/x86/entry/entry_32.S
> @@ -1017,7 +1017,7 @@ ENTRY(nmi)
> 
>    /* Not on SYSENTER stack. */
>    call    do_nmi
> -    jmp    .Lrestore_all_notrace
> +    jmp    .Lnmi_return
> 
> .Lnmi_from_sysenter_stack:
>    /*
> @@ -1028,7 +1028,11 @@ ENTRY(nmi)
>    movl    PER_CPU_VAR(cpu_current_top_of_stack), %esp
>    call    do_nmi
>    movl    %ebx, %esp
> -    jmp    .Lrestore_all_notrace
> +
> +.Lnmi_return:
> +    CHECK_AND_APPLY_ESPFIX
> +    RESTORE_REGS 4
> +    jmp    .Lirq_return
> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_ESPFIX32
> .Lnmi_espfix_stack:
> -- 
> 2.7.4
>