linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] x86/retpoline/entry: Disable the entire SYSCALL64 fast path with retpolines on

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c7d092ebc21e4aedbefa9bce58dcfed4@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Jan 2018 15:23:39 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Will Deacon' <will.deacon@....com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
CC:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Samuel Neves <samuel.c.p.neves@...il.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/retpoline/entry: Disable the entire SYSCALL64 fast
 path with retpolines on

From: Will Deacon
> Sent: 29 January 2018 13:20
...
> Another issue with this style of macro definition exists on architectures
> where the calling convention needs you to carry state around depending on
> how you packed the previous parameters. For example, on 32-bit ARM, 64-bit
> values are passed in adjacent pairs of registers but the low numbered
> register needs to be even. This is what stopped me from trying to use
> existing helpers such as syscall_get_arguments to unpack the pt_regs
> and it generally means that anything that says "get me argument n" is going
> to require constructing arguments 0..n-1 first.
> 
> To do this properly I think we'll either need to pass back the size and
> current register offset to the arch code, or just allow the thing to be
> overridden per syscall (the case above isn't especially frequent).

If you generate a structure from the argument list that might work
'by magic'.
Certainly you can add explicit pads to any structure.

	David