| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4A492A31.1000308@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:55:13 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To: Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mingo@...e.hu, jaswinder@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND Patch 1/2] Doc: update Documentation/exception.txt
Amerigo Wang wrote:
> Update Documentation/exception.txt.
> Remove trailing whitespaces in it.
>
> Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <amwang@...hat.com>
> Cc: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Ingo, do you want to merge these or should I do it?
Thanks.
> ---
> Index: linux-2.6/Documentation/exception.txt
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/Documentation/exception.txt
> +++ linux-2.6/Documentation/exception.txt
> @@ -1,123 +1,123 @@
> - Kernel level exception handling in Linux 2.1.8
> + Kernel level exception handling in Linux
> Commentary by Joerg Pommnitz <joerg@...eigh.ibm.com>
>
> -When a process runs in kernel mode, it often has to access user
> -mode memory whose address has been passed by an untrusted program.
> +When a process runs in kernel mode, it often has to access user
> +mode memory whose address has been passed by an untrusted program.
> To protect itself the kernel has to verify this address.
>
> -In older versions of Linux this was done with the
> -int verify_area(int type, const void * addr, unsigned long size)
> +In older versions of Linux this was done with the
> +int verify_area(int type, const void * addr, unsigned long size)
> function (which has since been replaced by access_ok()).
>
> -This function verified that the memory area starting at address
> +This function verified that the memory area starting at address
> 'addr' and of size 'size' was accessible for the operation specified
> -in type (read or write). To do this, verify_read had to look up the
> -virtual memory area (vma) that contained the address addr. In the
> -normal case (correctly working program), this test was successful.
> +in type (read or write). To do this, verify_read had to look up the
> +virtual memory area (vma) that contained the address addr. In the
> +normal case (correctly working program), this test was successful.
> It only failed for a few buggy programs. In some kernel profiling
> tests, this normally unneeded verification used up a considerable
> amount of time.
>
> -To overcome this situation, Linus decided to let the virtual memory
> +To overcome this situation, Linus decided to let the virtual memory
> hardware present in every Linux-capable CPU handle this test.
>
> How does this work?
>
> -Whenever the kernel tries to access an address that is currently not
> -accessible, the CPU generates a page fault exception and calls the
> -page fault handler
> +Whenever the kernel tries to access an address that is currently not
> +accessible, the CPU generates a page fault exception and calls the
> +page fault handler
>
> void do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code)
>
> -in arch/i386/mm/fault.c. The parameters on the stack are set up by
> -the low level assembly glue in arch/i386/kernel/entry.S. The parameter
> -regs is a pointer to the saved registers on the stack, error_code
> +in arch/x86/mm/fault.c. The parameters on the stack are set up by
> +the low level assembly glue in arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S. The parameter
> +regs is a pointer to the saved registers on the stack, error_code
> contains a reason code for the exception.
>
> -do_page_fault first obtains the unaccessible address from the CPU
> -control register CR2. If the address is within the virtual address
> -space of the process, the fault probably occurred, because the page
> -was not swapped in, write protected or something similar. However,
> -we are interested in the other case: the address is not valid, there
> -is no vma that contains this address. In this case, the kernel jumps
> -to the bad_area label.
> -
> -There it uses the address of the instruction that caused the exception
> -(i.e. regs->eip) to find an address where the execution can continue
> -(fixup). If this search is successful, the fault handler modifies the
> -return address (again regs->eip) and returns. The execution will
> +do_page_fault first obtains the unaccessible address from the CPU
> +control register CR2. If the address is within the virtual address
> +space of the process, the fault probably occurred, because the page
> +was not swapped in, write protected or something similar. However,
> +we are interested in the other case: the address is not valid, there
> +is no vma that contains this address. In this case, the kernel jumps
> +to the bad_area label.
> +
> +There it uses the address of the instruction that caused the exception
> +(i.e. regs->eip) to find an address where the execution can continue
> +(fixup). If this search is successful, the fault handler modifies the
> +return address (again regs->eip) and returns. The execution will
> continue at the address in fixup.
>
> Where does fixup point to?
>
> -Since we jump to the contents of fixup, fixup obviously points
> -to executable code. This code is hidden inside the user access macros.
> -I have picked the get_user macro defined in include/asm/uaccess.h as an
> -example. The definition is somewhat hard to follow, so let's peek at
> +Since we jump to the contents of fixup, fixup obviously points
> +to executable code. This code is hidden inside the user access macros.
> +I have picked the get_user macro defined in arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +as an example. The definition is somewhat hard to follow, so let's peek at
> the code generated by the preprocessor and the compiler. I selected
> -the get_user call in drivers/char/console.c for a detailed examination.
> +the get_user call in drivers/char/sysrq.c for a detailed examination.
>
> -The original code in console.c line 1405:
> +The original code in sysrq.c line 587:
> get_user(c, buf);
>
> The preprocessor output (edited to become somewhat readable):
>
> (
> - {
> - long __gu_err = - 14 , __gu_val = 0;
> - const __typeof__(*( ( buf ) )) *__gu_addr = ((buf));
> - if (((((0 + current_set[0])->tss.segment) == 0x18 ) ||
> - (((sizeof(*(buf))) <= 0xC0000000UL) &&
> - ((unsigned long)(__gu_addr ) <= 0xC0000000UL - (sizeof(*(buf)))))))
> + {
> + long __gu_err = - 14 , __gu_val = 0;
> + const __typeof__(*( ( buf ) )) *__gu_addr = ((buf));
> + if (((((0 + current_set[0])->tss.segment) == 0x18 ) ||
> + (((sizeof(*(buf))) <= 0xC0000000UL) &&
> + ((unsigned long)(__gu_addr ) <= 0xC0000000UL - (sizeof(*(buf)))))))
> do {
> - __gu_err = 0;
> - switch ((sizeof(*(buf)))) {
> - case 1:
> - __asm__ __volatile__(
> - "1: mov" "b" " %2,%" "b" "1\n"
> - "2:\n"
> - ".section .fixup,\"ax\"\n"
> - "3: movl %3,%0\n"
> - " xor" "b" " %" "b" "1,%" "b" "1\n"
> - " jmp 2b\n"
> - ".section __ex_table,\"a\"\n"
> - " .align 4\n"
> - " .long 1b,3b\n"
> + __gu_err = 0;
> + switch ((sizeof(*(buf)))) {
> + case 1:
> + __asm__ __volatile__(
> + "1: mov" "b" " %2,%" "b" "1\n"
> + "2:\n"
> + ".section .fixup,\"ax\"\n"
> + "3: movl %3,%0\n"
> + " xor" "b" " %" "b" "1,%" "b" "1\n"
> + " jmp 2b\n"
> + ".section __ex_table,\"a\"\n"
> + " .align 4\n"
> + " .long 1b,3b\n"
> ".text" : "=r"(__gu_err), "=q" (__gu_val): "m"((*(struct __large_struct *)
> - ( __gu_addr )) ), "i"(- 14 ), "0"( __gu_err )) ;
> - break;
> - case 2:
> + ( __gu_addr )) ), "i"(- 14 ), "0"( __gu_err )) ;
> + break;
> + case 2:
> __asm__ __volatile__(
> - "1: mov" "w" " %2,%" "w" "1\n"
> - "2:\n"
> - ".section .fixup,\"ax\"\n"
> - "3: movl %3,%0\n"
> - " xor" "w" " %" "w" "1,%" "w" "1\n"
> - " jmp 2b\n"
> - ".section __ex_table,\"a\"\n"
> - " .align 4\n"
> - " .long 1b,3b\n"
> + "1: mov" "w" " %2,%" "w" "1\n"
> + "2:\n"
> + ".section .fixup,\"ax\"\n"
> + "3: movl %3,%0\n"
> + " xor" "w" " %" "w" "1,%" "w" "1\n"
> + " jmp 2b\n"
> + ".section __ex_table,\"a\"\n"
> + " .align 4\n"
> + " .long 1b,3b\n"
> ".text" : "=r"(__gu_err), "=r" (__gu_val) : "m"((*(struct __large_struct *)
> - ( __gu_addr )) ), "i"(- 14 ), "0"( __gu_err ));
> - break;
> - case 4:
> - __asm__ __volatile__(
> - "1: mov" "l" " %2,%" "" "1\n"
> - "2:\n"
> - ".section .fixup,\"ax\"\n"
> - "3: movl %3,%0\n"
> - " xor" "l" " %" "" "1,%" "" "1\n"
> - " jmp 2b\n"
> - ".section __ex_table,\"a\"\n"
> - " .align 4\n" " .long 1b,3b\n"
> + ( __gu_addr )) ), "i"(- 14 ), "0"( __gu_err ));
> + break;
> + case 4:
> + __asm__ __volatile__(
> + "1: mov" "l" " %2,%" "" "1\n"
> + "2:\n"
> + ".section .fixup,\"ax\"\n"
> + "3: movl %3,%0\n"
> + " xor" "l" " %" "" "1,%" "" "1\n"
> + " jmp 2b\n"
> + ".section __ex_table,\"a\"\n"
> + " .align 4\n" " .long 1b,3b\n"
> ".text" : "=r"(__gu_err), "=r" (__gu_val) : "m"((*(struct __large_struct *)
> - ( __gu_addr )) ), "i"(- 14 ), "0"(__gu_err));
> - break;
> - default:
> - (__gu_val) = __get_user_bad();
> - }
> - } while (0) ;
> - ((c)) = (__typeof__(*((buf))))__gu_val;
> + ( __gu_addr )) ), "i"(- 14 ), "0"(__gu_err));
> + break;
> + default:
> + (__gu_val) = __get_user_bad();
> + }
> + } while (0) ;
> + ((c)) = (__typeof__(*((buf))))__gu_val;
> __gu_err;
> }
> );
> @@ -127,12 +127,12 @@ see what code gcc generates:
>
> > xorl %edx,%edx
> > movl current_set,%eax
> - > cmpl $24,788(%eax)
> - > je .L1424
> + > cmpl $24,788(%eax)
> + > je .L1424
> > cmpl $-1073741825,64(%esp)
> - > ja .L1423
> + > ja .L1423
> > .L1424:
> - > movl %edx,%eax
> + > movl %edx,%eax
> > movl 64(%esp),%ebx
> > #APP
> > 1: movb (%ebx),%dl /* this is the actual user access */
> @@ -149,17 +149,17 @@ see what code gcc generates:
> > .L1423:
> > movzbl %dl,%esi
>
> -The optimizer does a good job and gives us something we can actually
> -understand. Can we? The actual user access is quite obvious. Thanks
> -to the unified address space we can just access the address in user
> +The optimizer does a good job and gives us something we can actually
> +understand. Can we? The actual user access is quite obvious. Thanks
> +to the unified address space we can just access the address in user
> memory. But what does the .section stuff do?????
>
> To understand this we have to look at the final kernel:
>
> > objdump --section-headers vmlinux
> - >
> + >
> > vmlinux: file format elf32-i386
> - >
> + >
> > Sections:
> > Idx Name Size VMA LMA File off Algn
> > 0 .text 00098f40 c0100000 c0100000 00001000 2**4
> @@ -198,18 +198,18 @@ final kernel executable:
>
> The whole user memory access is reduced to 10 x86 machine instructions.
> The instructions bracketed in the .section directives are no longer
> -in the normal execution path. They are located in a different section
> +in the normal execution path. They are located in a different section
> of the executable file:
>
> > objdump --disassemble --section=.fixup vmlinux
> - >
> + >
> > c0199ff5 <.fixup+10b5> movl $0xfffffff2,%eax
> > c0199ffa <.fixup+10ba> xorb %dl,%dl
> > c0199ffc <.fixup+10bc> jmp c017e7a7 <do_con_write+e3>
>
> And finally:
> > objdump --full-contents --section=__ex_table vmlinux
> - >
> + >
> > c01aa7c4 93c017c0 e09f19c0 97c017c0 99c017c0 ................
> > c01aa7d4 f6c217c0 e99f19c0 a5e717c0 f59f19c0 ................
> > c01aa7e4 080a18c0 01a019c0 0a0a18c0 04a019c0 ................
> @@ -235,8 +235,8 @@ sections in the ELF object file. So the
> ended up in the .fixup section of the object file and the addresses
> .long 1b,3b
> ended up in the __ex_table section of the object file. 1b and 3b
> -are local labels. The local label 1b (1b stands for next label 1
> -backward) is the address of the instruction that might fault, i.e.
> +are local labels. The local label 1b (1b stands for next label 1
> +backward) is the address of the instruction that might fault, i.e.
> in our case the address of the label 1 is c017e7a5:
> the original assembly code: > 1: movb (%ebx),%dl
> and linked in vmlinux : > c017e7a5 <do_con_write+e1> movb (%ebx),%dl
> @@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ The assembly code
> becomes the value pair
> > c01aa7d4 c017c2f6 c0199fe9 c017e7a5 c0199ff5 ................
> ^this is ^this is
> - 1b 3b
> + 1b 3b
> c017e7a5,c0199ff5 in the exception table of the kernel.
>
> So, what actually happens if a fault from kernel mode with no suitable
> @@ -266,9 +266,9 @@ vma occurs?
> 3.) CPU calls do_page_fault
> 4.) do page fault calls search_exception_table (regs->eip == c017e7a5);
> 5.) search_exception_table looks up the address c017e7a5 in the
> - exception table (i.e. the contents of the ELF section __ex_table)
> + exception table (i.e. the contents of the ELF section __ex_table)
> and returns the address of the associated fault handle code c0199ff5.
> -6.) do_page_fault modifies its own return address to point to the fault
> +6.) do_page_fault modifies its own return address to point to the fault
> handle code and returns.
> 7.) execution continues in the fault handling code.
> 8.) 8a) EAX becomes -EFAULT (== -14)
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists