[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <6CCF65EF-325A-4207-9C5E-2CD2D8E2A7E4@amacapital.net>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 07:37:40 -0800
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
luto@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/entry: Clear extra registers beyond syscall arguments for 64bit kernels
> On Feb 5, 2018, at 3:42 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>
> * Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
>
>> + /*
>> + * Sanitize extra registers of values that a speculation attack
>> + * might want to exploit. In the CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER=y case,
>> + * the expectation is that %ebp will be clobbered before it
>> + * could be used.
>> + */
>> + .macro CLEAR_EXTRA_REGS_NOSPEC
>> + xorq %r15, %r15
>> + xorq %r14, %r14
>> + xorq %r13, %r13
>> + xorq %r12, %r12
>> + xorl %ebx, %ebx
>> +#ifndef CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER
>> + xorl %ebp, %ebp
>> +#endif
>> + .endm
>
> Yeah, so this series look pretty good to me, but there's one small detail: I think
> RBP should be cleared unconditionally here, even in the CONFIG_FRAME_POINTERS=y
> case, because:
ENCODE_FRAME_POINTER should take care of rbp, though.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists