linux-kernel - [tip:x86/urgent] x86/fpu: Fix boot crash in the early FPU code

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: <tip-b96fecbfa8c88b057e2bbf10021521c232bb3650@git.kernel.org>
Date:	Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:09:34 -0700
From:	tip-bot for Ingo Molnar <tipbot@...or.com>
To:	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	tglx@...utronix.de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	luto@...capital.net, dvlasenk@...hat.com, oleg@...hat.com,
	mingo@...nel.org, jack@...e.cz, bp@...en8.de, brgerst@...il.com,
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com, fenghua.yu@...el.com,
	peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	quentin.casasnovas@...cle.com
Subject: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/fpu: Fix boot crash in the early FPU code

Commit-ID:  b96fecbfa8c88b057e2bbf10021521c232bb3650
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/b96fecbfa8c88b057e2bbf10021521c232bb3650
Author:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
AuthorDate: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 09:58:19 +0200
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CommitDate: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 10:05:56 +0200

x86/fpu: Fix boot crash in the early FPU code

Jan Kara and Thomas Gleixner reported boot crashes in the FPU
code:

  general protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP
  RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff81048a6c>]  [<ffffffff81048a6c>] mxcsr_feature_mask_init+0x1c/0x40

  2b:*  0f ae 85 00 fe ff ff    fxsave -0x200(%rbp)

and bisected it down to the following FPU commit:

   91a8c2a5b43f ("x86/fpu: Clean up and fix MXCSR handling")

The reason is that the on-stack FPU registers state variable,
used by the FXSAVE instruction, did not have the required
minimum alignment of 16 bytes, causing the general protection
fault.

This is most likely a GCC bug in older GCC versions, but the
offending commit also added a bogus extra 32-byte alignment
(which GCC ignored too).

So fix this bug by making the variable static again, but also
mark it __initdata this time, because fpu__init_system_mxcsr()
is now an __init function.

Reported-and-bisected-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Reported-bisected-and-tested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Quentin Casasnovas <quentin.casasnovas@...cle.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150704075819.GA9201@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/fpu/init.c | 7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/init.c b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/init.c
index fc878fe..3282679 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/init.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/init.c
@@ -95,11 +95,12 @@ static void __init fpu__init_system_mxcsr(void)
 	unsigned int mask = 0;
 
 	if (cpu_has_fxsr) {
-		struct fxregs_state fx_tmp __aligned(32) = { };
+		/* Static because GCC does not get 16-byte stack alignment right: */
+		static struct fxregs_state fxregs __initdata;
 
-		asm volatile("fxsave %0" : "+m" (fx_tmp));
+		asm volatile("fxsave %0" : "+m" (fxregs));
 
-		mask = fx_tmp.mxcsr_mask;
+		mask = fxregs.mxcsr_mask;
 
 		/*
 		 * If zero then use the default features mask,
--
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/