[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54B6C6D1.3010804@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 11:43:13 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
CC: X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.19 v2 2/3] x86, mpx: Short-circuit the instruction decoder
for unexpected opcodes
On 01/12/2015 03:57 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> >> - /*
>>> >> - * We only _really_ need to decode bndcl/bndcn/bndcu
>>> >> - * Error out on anything else.
>>> >> - */
>>> >> - if (insn->opcode.bytes[0] != 0x0f)
>>> >> - goto bad_opcode;
>>> >> - if ((insn->opcode.bytes[1] != 0x1a) &&
>>> >> - (insn->opcode.bytes[1] != 0x1b))
>>> >> - goto bad_opcode;
>> >
>> > Otherwise, this looks OK to me. Have you tested this at all? I know
>> > you don't have any MPX hardware, but you can still hack something in to
>> > point the instruction decoder at an MPX binary.
> I haven't tested this at all. ISTM it's more likely that any test
> hack I write for this will mask any problem than that it will be a
> real test.
This is completely and totally broken when there is an instruction
prefix. Instruction prefixes which occur before the opcodes in the
buffer, so buf[0] is not necessarily insn->opcode.bytes[0].
This was immediately obvious when I actually ran this code for the first
time, even on hardware without MPX.
--
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