[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK1hOcN2jjfjNArnD8Uw68GCgHCXui59M3HETYE5YaR_Apxa4A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 10:55:16 +0100
From: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Andrey Wagin <avagin@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3 v3] x86: entry_64.S: always allocate complete "struct pt_regs"
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On 02/25/2015 09:10 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> This part?
>>
>> .macro FORK_LIKE func
>> ENTRY(stub_\func)
>> CFI_STARTPROC
>> - popq %r11 /* save return address */
>> - PARTIAL_FRAME 0
>> - SAVE_REST
>> - pushq %r11 /* put it back on stack */
>> + DEFAULT_FRAME 0, 8 /* offset 8: return address */
>> + SAVE_EXTRA_REGS 8
>> FIXUP_TOP_OF_STACK %r11, 8
>> - DEFAULT_FRAME 0 8 /* offset 8: return address */
>> call sys_\func
>> RESTORE_TOP_OF_STACK %r11, 8
>> - ret $REST_SKIP /* pop extended registers */
>> + ret
>> CFI_ENDPROC
>> END(stub_\func)
>> .endm
>>
>> FORK_LIKE clone
>> FORK_LIKE fork
>> FORK_LIKE vfork
>>
>> But the old code (SAVE_REST thing) was also saving registers here.
>> It had to jump through hoops (pop return address, SAVE_REST,
>> push return address) to do that.
>> After the patch, "SAVE_EXTRA_REGS 8" does the same, just without
>> pop/push pair.
>>
>> I just don't see what's wrong with it. Can you elaborate?
>
> SAVE_REST pushed the regs onto the stack, whereas SAVE_EXTRA_REGS just
> writes them in place. It's possible for this to be called when the
> regs have already been saved.
If that would be the case - that is, if SAVE_REST was saving extra copy
of registers on stack, then FIXUP_TOP_OF_STACK %r11, 8 would be working
on wrong locations. The "8" there says "we have full pt_regs on stack,
plus extra 8 bytes (the return address)". Your conjecture would mean
that in fact there would be more bytes on stack, and FIXUP_TOP_OF_STACK
would corrupt iret stack. Evidently, since old code was not crashing,
this wasn't happening. SAVE_REST was really creating the "tail" of pt_regs.
In addition to my previous tests, I ran my home machine with
patched kernel. Unfortunately, it works for me :(
Will try on yet another machine.
--
vda
--
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