linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 02/10] x86: Compile-time asm code validation

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: <CALCETrXG3N_5279NoMCS3aZe28Uch9Hqzpmjw0v4HHuDz9Dabg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 10 Jun 2015 11:18:40 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.com>
Cc:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	live-patching@...r.kernel.org, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/10] x86: Compile-time asm code validation

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 10:21:36AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Jun 10, 2015 5:07 AM, "Josh Poimboeuf" <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Add a new CONFIG_ASM_VALIDATION option which adds an asmvalidate host
>> > tool which runs on every compiled .S file.  Its goal is to enforce sane
>> > rules on all asm code, so that stack debug metadata (frame/back chain
>> > pointers and/or DWARF CFI metadata) can be made reliable.
>> >
>> > It enforces the following rules:
>> >
>> > 1. Each callable function must be annotated with the ELF STT_FUNC type.
>> >    This is typically done using the ENTRY/ENDPROC macros.  If
>> >    asmvalidate finds a return instruction outside of a function, it
>> >    flags an error, since that usually indicates callable code which
>> >    should be annotated accordingly.
>> >
>> > 2. Each callable function must never leave its own bounds (i.e. with a
>> >    jump to outside the function) except when returning.
>>
>> Won't that break with sibling/tail calls?  GCC can generate those, and
>> the ia32_ptregs_common label is an example of such a thing.
>
> It only validates hand-written assembly, so how it could?
>

It's a hand-written tail call.

--Andy
--
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/