linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: Simplify indirect_branch_prediction

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: <20180206234932.jlctz3u5ybq6gunz@treble>
Date:   Tue, 6 Feb 2018 17:49:32 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com,
        pjt@...gle.com, jikos@...nel.org, gregkh@...ux-foundation.org,
        dave.hansen@...el.com, riel@...hat.com, luto@...capital.net,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        keescook@...gle.com, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: Simplify
 indirect_branch_prediction_barrier()

On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 11:31:18PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 17:25 -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 07:44:52PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Fri, 2018-01-26 at 21:08 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Make it all a function which does the WRMSR instead of having a hairy
> > > > inline asm.
> > > ...
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > +	alternative_input("",
> > > > +			 "call __ibp_barrier",
> > > > +			 X86_FEATURE_IBPB,
> > > > +			 ASM_NO_INPUT_CLOBBER("eax", "ecx", "edx", "memory"));
> > > >  }
> > > Dammit. I know the best time to comment is *before* I add my own sign-
> > > off to it and before Linus has merged it but... I think this is broken.
> > > 
> > > If you're calling a C function then you have to mark *all* the call-
> > > clobbered registers as, well, clobbered.
> > > 
> > > If you really really really want to *call* something out of line, then
> > > it would need to be implemented in asm.
> >
> > Hm.  In theory I agree this seems like a bug.  On x86_64 I believe we
> > would need to mark the following registers as clobbered: r8-r11, ax, cx,
> > dx, si, di, plus "memory" and "cc".
> > 
> > But I'm scratching my head a bit, because we seem to have this bug all
> > over the kernel.  (Grep for ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT to see them.)
> > 
> > Many of those inline asm calls have been around a long time.  So why
> > hasn't it ever bitten us?
> 
> How many are actually calling C functions, not asm or other special
> cases like firmware entry points?

I think many, and maybe even most, are calling normal C functions.

-- 
Josh