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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 12:41:49 +0100 From: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk> To: Alex Thorlton <athorlton@....com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>, Russ Anderson <rja@....com>, Mike Travis <travis@....com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix efi_call On Wed, 11 May, at 02:55:45PM, Alex Thorlton wrote: > The efi_call assembly code has a slight error that prevents us from > using arguments 7 and higher, which will be passed in on the stack. > > mov (%rsp), %rax > mov 8(%rax), %rax > ... > mov %rax, 40(%rsp) > > This code goes and grabs the return address for the current stack frame, > and puts it on the stack, next the 5th argument for the EFI runtime > call. Considering the fact that having the return address in that > position on the stack makes no sense, I'm guessing that the intent of > this code was actually to grab an argument off the stack frame for this > call and place it into the frame for the next one. > > The small change to that offset (i.e. 8(%rax) to 16(%rax)) ensures that > we grab the 7th argument off the stack, and pass it as the 6th argument > to the EFI runtime function that we're about to call. This change gets > our EFI runtime calls that need to pass more than 6 arguments working > again. > > Signed-off-by: Alex Thorlton <athorlton@....com> > Cc: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com> > Cc: Russ Anderson <rja@....com> > Cc: Mike Travis <travis@....com> > Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk> > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com> > Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> > Cc: x86@...nel.org > Cc: linux-efi@...r.kernel.org > --- > arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S > index 92723ae..62938ff 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S > +++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S > @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ ENTRY(efi_call) > FRAME_BEGIN > SAVE_XMM > mov (%rsp), %rax > - mov 8(%rax), %rax > + mov 16(%rax), %rax > subq $48, %rsp > mov %r9, 32(%rsp) > mov %rax, 40(%rsp) Nice. Your fix looks good, so I've put it in the urgent queue and tagged it for stable.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists