linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 13/21] x86/asm/crypto: Fix frame pointer usage in aesni-intel

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: <20150717194307.GA26757@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Jul 2015 21:43:07 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 13/21] x86/asm/crypto: Fix frame pointer usage in
 aesni-intel_asm.S


* Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:

>  ENTRY(aesni_set_key)
> +	FRAME
>  #ifndef __x86_64__
>  	pushl KEYP
>  	movl 8(%esp), KEYP		# ctx
> @@ -1905,6 +1907,7 @@ ENTRY(aesni_set_key)
>  #ifndef __x86_64__
>  	popl KEYP
>  #endif
> +	ENDFRAME
>  	ret
>  ENDPROC(aesni_set_key)

So cannot we make this a bit more compact and less fragile?

Instead of:

	ENTRY(aesni_set_key)
		FRAME
	...
		ENDFRAME
		ret
	ENDPROC(aesni_set_key)


How about writing this as:

	FUNCTION_ENTRY(aesni_set_key)
	...
	FUNCTION_RETURN(aesni_set_key)

which does the same thing in a short, symmetric construct?

One potential problem with this approach would be that what 'looks' like an entry 
declaration, but it will now generate real code.

OTOH if people find this intuitive enough then it's a lot harder to mess it up, 
and I think 'RETURN' makes it clear enough that there's a real instruction 
generated there.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/