linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/4] x86: bpf_jit: implement bpf_tail

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: <555CB668.2090901@plumgrid.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 May 2015 09:29:28 -0700
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
CC:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Michael Holzheu <holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@...il.com>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/4] x86: bpf_jit: implement bpf_tail_call()
 helper

On 5/20/15 9:05 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>> What causes the stack pointer to be right?  Is there some reason that
>>> the stack pointer is the same no matter where you are in the generated
>>> code?
>>
>>
>> that's why I said 'it's _roughly_ expressed in C' this way.
>> Stack pointer doesn't change. It uses the same stack frame.
>>
>
> I think the more relevant point is that (I think) eBPF never changes
> the stack pointer after the prologue (i.e. the stack depth is truly
> constant).

ahh, that's what you were referring to.
Yes, there is no alloca(). stack cannot grow and always fixed.
That's critical for safety verification.
On a JIT side though, x64 has ugly div/mod, so JIT is doing
push/pop rax/rdx to compile 'dst_reg /= src_reg' bpf insn.
But that doesn't change 'same stack depth' rule at the time
of bpf_tail_call.
Note, s390 JIT can generate different prologue/epilogue
for every program, so it will likely be doing stack unwind
and jump. Like I was doing in my tail_call_v2 version of x64 jit:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/ast/bpf.git/diff/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c?h=tail_call_v2&id=bfd60c3135c8f010a6497dfc5e7d3070e26ca4d1

In case of interrupt happens sometime during this jumping process
it's also fine. no-red-zone business is very dear to my heart :)
I always keep it in mind when doing assembler/jit changes.

--
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/