linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get

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: <20170713203416.isvijqbwbcgupgj7@treble>
Date:   Thu, 13 Jul 2017 15:34:16 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Andrey Rybainin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>
Cc:     Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Chris J Arges <chris.j.arges@...onical.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-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Michael Davidson <md@...gle.com>,
        Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@...gle.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Stephen Hines <srhines@...gle.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Bernhard.Rosenkranzer@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in
 get_user() inline asm"

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 11:20:04PM +0300, Andrey Rybainin wrote:
> On 07/13/2017 09:47 PM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for your analysis!
> > 
> >> What happens if you try the below patch instead of the revert?  Any
> >> chance the offending instruction goes away?
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> >> index 11433f9..beac907 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> >> @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ __typeof__(__builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(x) > sizeof(0UL), 0ULL, 0UL))
> >>  	might_fault();							\
> >>  	asm volatile("call __get_user_%P4"				\
> >>  		     : "=a" (__ret_gu), "=r" (__val_gu), "+r" (__sp)	\
> >> -		     : "0" (ptr), "i" (sizeof(*(ptr))));		\
> >> +		     : "0" (ptr), "i" (sizeof(*(ptr))), "r" (__sp));	\
> >>  	(x) = (__force __typeof__(*(ptr))) __val_gu;			\
> >>  	__builtin_expect(__ret_gu, 0);					\
> >>  })
> > 
> > The generated code is basically the same, only that now the value from
> > the stack is stored in a register and written twice to RSP:
> > 
> 
> AFAIR clang works much better with global named registers.
> Could you check if the patch bellow helps?

And yet another one to try (clobbering sp) :-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
index 11433f9..21f0c39 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
@@ -166,12 +166,12 @@ __typeof__(__builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(x) > sizeof(0UL), 0ULL, 0UL))
 ({									\
 	int __ret_gu;							\
 	register __inttype(*(ptr)) __val_gu asm("%"_ASM_DX);		\
-	register void *__sp asm(_ASM_SP);				\
 	__chk_user_ptr(ptr);						\
 	might_fault();							\
-	asm volatile("call __get_user_%P4"				\
-		     : "=a" (__ret_gu), "=r" (__val_gu), "+r" (__sp)	\
-		     : "0" (ptr), "i" (sizeof(*(ptr))));		\
+	asm volatile("call __get_user_%P3"				\
+		     : "=a" (__ret_gu), "=r" (__val_gu)			\
+		     : "0" (ptr), "i" (sizeof(*(ptr)))			\
+		     : "sp");						\
 	(x) = (__force __typeof__(*(ptr))) __val_gu;			\
 	__builtin_expect(__ret_gu, 0);					\
 })