linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/17] x86, fpu: wrap get_xsave

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALCETrV864te0pYhKewGzZGvfEJYkYs1kCTjHW8HkncrugYChw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Mar 2015 15:28:40 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Suresh Siddha <sbsiddha@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/17] x86, fpu: wrap get_xsave_addr() to make it safer

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
> From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
>
> The MPX code appears to be saving off the FPU in an unsafe
> way.   It does not disable preemption or ensure that the
> FPU state has been allocated.
>
> This patch introduces a new helper which will do both of
> those things internally to a helper.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
> Cc: Suresh Siddha <sbsiddha@...il.com>
> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
> Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
> Cc: the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/xsave.h |  1 +
>  arch/x86/kernel/xsave.c      | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 33 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/xsave.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/xsave.h
> index c9a6d68..86b58fb 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/xsave.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/xsave.h
> @@ -252,6 +252,7 @@ static inline int xrestore_user(struct xsave_struct __user *buf, u64 mask)
>  }
>
>  void *get_xsave_addr(struct xsave_struct *xsave, int xstate);
> +void *tsk_get_xsave_field(struct task_struct *tsk, int xstate_field);
>  void setup_xstate_comp(void);
>
>  #endif
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/xsave.c b/arch/x86/kernel/xsave.c
> index 34f66e5..9919e7e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/xsave.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/xsave.c
> @@ -740,3 +740,35 @@ void *get_xsave_addr(struct xsave_struct *xsave, int xstate)
>         return (void *)xsave + xstate_comp_offsets[feature];
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(get_xsave_addr);
> +
> +/*
> + * This wraps up the common operations that need to occur when retrieving
> + * data from an xsave struct.  It first ensures that the task was actually
> + * using the FPU and retrieves the data in to a buffer.  It then calculates
> + * the offset of the requested field in the buffer.
> + *
> + * This function is safe to call whether the FPU is in use or not.
> + *
> + * Inputs:
> + *     tsk: the task from which we are fetching xsave state
> + *     xstate: state which is defined in xsave.h (e.g. XSTATE_FP, XSTATE_SSE,
> + *     etc.)
> + * Output:
> + *     address of the state in the xsave area.
> + */
> +void *tsk_get_xsave_field(struct task_struct *tsk, int xsave_field)
> +{
> +       union thread_xstate *xstate;
> +
> +       unlazy_fpu(tsk);
> +       xstate = tsk->thread.fpu.state;
> +       /*
> +        * This might be unallocated if the FPU
> +        * was never in use.
> +        */
> +       if (!xstate)
> +               return NULL;
> +
> +       return get_xsave_addr(&xstate->xsave, xsave_field);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tsk_get_xsave_field);
> --
> 1.9.1
>

I have one objection to get_xsave_addr and tsk_get_xsave_field: I
think that get_xsave_addr should be called either
get_xsave_addr_for_read or get_xsave_addr_for_write, depending on
which of those it does.

Your function appears to be getting it for write (I assume that's what
the unlazy_fpu is for), so I'd rather have it called
tsk_get_xsave_field_for_write or something like that.

--Andy


-- 
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
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/