linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] x86: make DR*

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]

Message-ID: <20130428172731.GA26169@redhat.com>
Date:	Sun, 28 Apr 2013 19:27:31 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86: make DR*_RESERVED unsigned long

On 04/28, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 04:45:37PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > -/* Define reserved bits in DR6 which are always set to 1 */
> > -#define DR6_RESERVED	(0xFFFF0FF0)
> > +#define DR6_MASK	(0xF00FU)	/* Everything else is reserved */
>
> I'm personally fine either with that or with Peter's suggestion to do:
>
> -#define DR6_RESERVED (0xFFFF0FF0)
> +#define DR6_RESERVED (~0xF00FUL)

I missed this suggestion...

Yes, and this allows to kill ifdef too.

> If this should stay stable UAPI,

I do not know, but I guess it would be safer to keep the old define's.

> I really don't mind.

Oh, I do not mind too ;)

OK, please see v3.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [PATCH v3] x86: make DR*_RESERVED unsigned long

DR6_RESERVED and DR_CONTROL_RESERVED are used to clear the unwanted
bits in the "unsigned long" data, but "ulong &= ~int" also clears the
upper bits that are not specified in mask.

This is actually fine, dr6[32:63] are reserved, but this is not clear
so it would be better to make them "unsigned long" to cleanup the code.

However, depending on sizeof(long), DR6_RESERVED should be either
0xFFFF0FF0 or 0xFFFFFFFF_FFFF0FF0, so this patch redefines them as
(~ 32_bit_mask UL) to avoid ifdef's.

Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Suggested-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
---
 arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/debugreg.h |    8 ++------
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/debugreg.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/debugreg.h
index 3c0874d..4ff5d05 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/debugreg.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/debugreg.h
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
    are either reserved or not of interest to us. */
 
 /* Define reserved bits in DR6 which are always set to 1 */
-#define DR6_RESERVED	(0xFFFF0FF0)
+#define DR6_RESERVED	(~0xF00FUL)
 
 #define DR_TRAP0	(0x1)		/* db0 */
 #define DR_TRAP1	(0x2)		/* db1 */
@@ -64,11 +64,7 @@
    We can slow the instruction pipeline for instructions coming via the
    gdt or the ldt if we want to.  I am not sure why this is an advantage */
 
-#ifdef __i386__
-#define DR_CONTROL_RESERVED (0xFC00) /* Reserved by Intel */
-#else
-#define DR_CONTROL_RESERVED (0xFFFFFFFF0000FC00UL) /* Reserved */
-#endif
+#define DR_CONTROL_RESERVED (~0xFFFF03FFUL) /* Reserved by Intel */
 
 #define DR_LOCAL_SLOWDOWN (0x100)   /* Local slow the pipeline */
 #define DR_GLOBAL_SLOWDOWN (0x200)  /* Global slow the pipeline */
-- 
1.5.5.1


--
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/