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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 14:13:44 -0500 From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: "Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@...izon.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "live-patching@...r.kernel.org" <live-patching@...r.kernel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] x86/unwind: add ORC unwinder On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 12:03:51PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote: > > > > Take for example the lock_is_held_type() function. In vmlinux, it has > > the following instruction: > > > > callq *0xffffffff85a94880 (pv_irq_ops.save_fl) > > > > At runtime, that instruction is patched and replaced with a fast inline > > version of arch_local_save_flags() which eliminates the call: > > > > pushfq > > pop %rax > > > > The problem is when an interrupt hits after the push: > > > > pushfq > > --- irq --- > > pop %rax > > That should actually be something easily fixable, for an odd reason: > the instruction boundaries are different. > > > I'm not sure what the solution should be. It will probably need to be > > one of the following: > > > > a) either don't allow runtime "alternative" patches to mess with the > > stack pointer (objtool could enforce this); or > > > > b) come up with some way to register such patches with the ORC > > unwinder at runtime. > > c) just add ORC data for the alternative statically and _unconditionally_. > > No runtime registration. Just an unconditional entry for the > particular IP that comes after the "pushfq". It cannot match the > "callq" instruction, since it would be in the middle of that > instruction. > > Basically, just do a "union" of the ORC data for all the alternatives. > > Now, objtool should still verify that the instruction pointers for > alternatives are unique - or that they share the same ORC unwinder > information if they are not. > > But in cases like this, when the instruction boundaires are different, > things should "just work", with no need for any special cases. > > Hmm? Yeah, that might work. Objtool already knows about alternatives, so it might not be too hard. I'll try it. And it can spit out a warning if we get two different ORC states for the same address after doing the "union". Then I guess we'd have to rearrange things or sprinkle some nops to work around it. -- Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists