linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] new SYSCALL_DEFINE/COMPAT_SYSCALL

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180326034750.GN30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 26 Mar 2018 04:47:50 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        James Hogan <jhogan@...nel.org>,
        linux-mips <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] new SYSCALL_DEFINE/COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE wrappers

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 01:40:17AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:

> Kinda-sorta part:
> 	* asmlinkage_protect is taken out for now, so m68k has problems.
> 	* syscalls that run out of 6 slots barf violently.  For mips it's
> wrong (there we have 8 slots); for stuff like arm and ppc it's right, but
> it means that things like e.g. compat sync_file_range() should not even
> be compiled on those.  __ARCH_WANT_SYS_SYNC_FILE_RANGE, presumably...
> In any case, we *can't* do pt_regs-based wrappers for those syscalls on
> such architectures, so ifdefs around those puppies are probably the right
> thing to do.
> 	* s390 macrology in compat_wrapper.c not even touched; it needs
> a trivial update to keep working (__MAP callbacks take an extra argument,
> unused for those users).
> 	* sys_... and compat_sys_... aliases are unchanged; if we kill
> direct callers, we can trivially rename SyS##name and compat_SyS##name
> to sys##name and compat_sys##name and get rid of aliases.

	* mips n32 and x86 x32 can become an extra source of headache.
That actually applies to any plans of passing struct pt_regs *.  As it
is, e.g. syscall 515 on amd64 is compat_sys_readv().  Dispatched via
this:
        /*
         * NB: Native and x32 syscalls are dispatched from the same
         * table.  The only functional difference is the x32 bit in
         * regs->orig_ax, which changes the behavior of some syscalls.
         */
        if (likely((nr & __SYSCALL_MASK) < NR_syscalls)) {
                nr = array_index_nospec(nr & __SYSCALL_MASK, NR_syscalls);
                regs->ax = sys_call_table[nr](
                        regs->di, regs->si, regs->dx,
                        regs->r10, regs->r8, regs->r9);
        }
Now, syscall 145 via 32bit call is *also* compat_sys_readv(), dispatched
via
                nr = array_index_nospec(nr, IA32_NR_syscalls);
                /*
                 * It's possible that a 32-bit syscall implementation
                 * takes a 64-bit parameter but nonetheless assumes that
                 * the high bits are zero.  Make sure we zero-extend all
                 * of the args.
                 */
                regs->ax = ia32_sys_call_table[nr](
                        (unsigned int)regs->bx, (unsigned int)regs->cx,
                        (unsigned int)regs->dx, (unsigned int)regs->si,
                        (unsigned int)regs->di, (unsigned int)regs->bp);
Right now it works - we call the same function, passing it arguments picked
from different set of registers (di/si/dx in x32 case, bx/cx/dx in i386 one).
But if we switch to passing struct pt_regs * and have the wrapper fetch
regs->{bx,cx,dx}, we have a problem.  It won't work for both entry points.

IMO it's a good reason to have dispatcher(s) handle extraction from pt_regs
and let the wrapper deal with the resulting 6 u64 or 6 u32, normalizing
them and arranging them into arguments expected by syscall body.

Linus, Dominik - how do you plan dealing with that fun?  Regardless of the
way we generate the glue, the issue remains.  We can't get the same
struct pt_regs *-taking function for both; we either need to produce
a separate chunk of glue for each compat_sys_... involved (either making
COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE generate both, or having duplicate X32_SYSCALL_DEFINE
for each of those COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE - with identical body, at that)
or we need to have the registers-to-slots mapping done in dispatcher...