[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1515455902.4423.59.camel@amazon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 23:58:22 +0000
From: "Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@...gle.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 11/10] x86/retpoline: Avoid return buffer underflows
on context switch
On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 15:56 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 3:44 PM, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > To guard against this fill the return buffer with controlled
> > content during context switch. This prevents any underflows.
>
> Ugh. I really dislike this patch. Everything else in the retpoline
> patches makes me go "ok, that's reasonable". This one makes me go
> "Eww".
>
> It's hacky, it's ugly, and it looks pretty expensive too.
>
> Is there really nothing more clever we can do?
You get this part in the IBRS/microcode solution too. The IBRS MSR
doesn't catch everything; you still need to stuff the RSB in very
similar places (and/or use the IBPB MSR in some).
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (5210 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists