linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/3] x86: Add workaround to NMI iret woes

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:	Fri, 9 Dec 2011 10:02:49 -0500
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/3] x86: Add workaround to NMI iret woes

* Steven Rostedt (rostedt@...dmis.org) wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 08:02 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * Mathieu Desnoyers (mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com) wrote:
> 
> > after a quick IRC discussion with Peter Zijlstra, one thing seems to be
> > missing here to handle the INT3->NMI->INT3 issue: this could be achieved
> > by splitting the DEBUG stack in 2 sub-stacks, and letting the int3
> > handler keep track of its nesting within its own stack with an extra
> > "int3_nest_count". AFAIU, supporting 2 nested int3 should be enough.
> 
> Here's the problem. When you take an int3, the hardware loads stuff onto
> the stack for you. That's the SS, RSP, FLAGS, CS, RIP. If the NMI comes
> in while we are processing a breakpoint, and the NMI hits an int3 too,
> then the hardware will load the current SS, RSP, FLAGS, CS and RIP onto
> the stack at the exact same place as the breakpoint processing that was
> interrupted had it's interrupt frame. IOW, it just corrupted the stack.
> 
> To prevent this in the NMI code, I did ugly things like making copies of
> the interrupt frame to keep a nested NMI from corrupting the first NMI.
> Not only do I not want to do this ugly hack for debug exception, you
> *can't* do it. It wont work!
> 
> The reason the NMI works is because while we are copying the stack
> frame, NMIs are disabled because we are currently in an NMI.
> 
> But a normal int3, as it tries to do the copy and an NMI triggers, if
> you don't update the IDT, any int3 that the NMI hits will corrupt the
> previous int3 processing's stack. The hardware does it, there's nothing
> a "split stack" will do to fix that.

yep, doing that in the "real" nmi handler (with NMIs disabled at that
point) makes tons of sense.

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
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/