linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86, paravirt, xen: Remove the 64-bit irq_enable

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:	Mon, 6 Apr 2015 13:03:19 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Cc:	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
	X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86, paravirt, xen: Remove the 64-bit
 irq_enable_sysexit pvop

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Boris Ostrovsky
<boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On 04/06/2015 01:44 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>
>> On 06/04/2015 16:29, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
>>> <konrad.wilk@...cle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 03:52:30PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [cc: Boris and Konrad.  Whoops]
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We don't use irq_enable_sysexit on 64-bit kernels any more.  Remove
>>>>
>>>> Is there an commit (or name of patch) that explains why
>>>> 32-bit-user-space-on-64-bit
>>>> kernels is unsavory?
>>>
>>> sysexit never tasted very good :-p
>>>
>>> We're (hopefully) not breaking 32-bit-user-space-on-64-bit, but we're
>>> trying an unconventional approach to making the code faster and less
>>> scary.  As a result, 64-bit kernels won't use sysexit any more.
>>> Hopefully Xen is okay with the slightly sneaky thing we're doing.
>>> AFAICT Xen thinks of sysretl and sysexit as slightly funny irets, so I
>>> don't expect there to be any problem.
>>
>> 64bit PV kernels must bounce through Xen to switch from the kernel to
>> the user pagetables (since both kernel and userspace are both actually
>> running in ring3 with user pages).
>>
>> As a result, exit to userspace ends up as a hypercall into Xen which has
>> an effect very similar to an `iret`, but with some extra fixup in the
>> background.
>>
>> I can't forsee any Xen issues as a result of this patch.
>
>
>
> I ran tip plus this patch (plus another patch that fixes an unrelated Xen
> regression in tip) through our test suite and it completed without problems.
>
> I also ran some very simple 32-bit programs in a 64-bit PV guest and didn't
> see any problems there neither.

At the risk of redundancy, did you test on Intel hardware?  At least
on native systems, the code in question never executes on AMD systems.

--Andy

>
> -boris
>



-- 
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/