[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220206115816.GA23216@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2022 12:58:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc-plugins/stackleak: Use noinstr in favor of notrace
On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 04:19:18PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> While the stackleak plugin was already using notrace, objtool is now a
> bit more picky. Update the notrace uses to noinstr. Silences these
> warnings:
>
> vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: do_syscall_64()+0x9: call to stackleak_track_stack() leaves .noinstr.text section
> vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: do_int80_syscall_32()+0x9: call to stackleak_track_stack() leaves .noinstr.text section
> vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: exc_general_protection()+0x22: call to stackleak_track_stack() leaves .noinstr.text section
> vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: fixup_bad_iret()+0x20: call to stackleak_track_stack() leaves .noinstr.text section
> vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: do_machine_check()+0x27: call to stackleak_track_stack() leaves .noinstr.text section
> vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: .text+0x5346e: call to stackleak_erase() leaves .noinstr.text section
> vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: .entry.text+0x143: call to stackleak_erase() leaves .noinstr.text section
> vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: .entry.text+0x10eb: call to stackleak_erase() leaves .noinstr.text section
> vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: .entry.text+0x17f9: call to stackleak_erase() leaves .noinstr.text section
>
> Cc: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>
> Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YYENAKB0igNFnFmK@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net/
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> ---
> Is it correct to exclude .noinstr.text here? That means any functions called in
> there will have their stack utilization untracked. This doesn't seem right to me,
> though. Shouldn't stackleak_track_stack() just be marked noinstr instead?
This patch is right. stackleak_track_stack() cannot be marked noinstr
becaues it accesses things that might not be there.
Consider what happens if we pull the PTI page-table swap into the
noinstr C part.
> @@ -446,6 +447,8 @@ static bool stackleak_gate(void)
> return false;
> if (!strncmp(TREE_STRING_POINTER(section), ".meminit.text", 13))
> return false;
> + if (!strncmp(TREE_STRING_POINTER(section), ".noinstr.text", 13))
> + return false;
For paranoia's sake I'd like .entry.text added there as well.
> }
>
> return track_frame_size >= 0;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists