linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/6] x86/vdso: Move out the CPU number store

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: <e8ce8b96-95fd-9cfa-29a8-155d74b1043d@nextfour.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Jun 2018 08:19:43 +0300
From:   Mika Penttilä <mika.penttila@...tfour.com>
To:     "Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@...el.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] x86/vdso: Move out the CPU number store

On 06/05/2018 07:44 AM, Bae, Chang Seok wrote:
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup_percpu.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup_percpu.c
>>> index ea554f8..e716e94 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup_percpu.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup_percpu.c
>>> @@ -155,12 +155,21 @@ static void __init pcpup_populate_pte(unsigned long addr)
>>>  
>>>  static inline void setup_percpu_segment(int cpu)
>>>  {
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
>>> -	struct desc_struct d = GDT_ENTRY_INIT(0x8092, per_cpu_offset(cpu),
>>> -					      0xFFFFF);
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
>>> +	unsigned long node = early_cpu_to_node(cpu);
>>> +#else
>>> +	unsigned long node = 0;
>>> +#endif
>>> +	struct desc_struct d = GDT_ENTRY_INIT(0x0, per_cpu_offset(cpu),
>>> +			   make_lsl_tscp(cpu, node));
>>> +
>>> +	d.type = 5;	/* R0 data, expand down, accessed */
>>> +	d.dpl = 3;	/* Visible to user code */
>>> +	d.s = 1;	/* Not a system segment */
>>> +	d.p = 1;	/* Present */
>>> +	d.d = 1;	/* 32-bit */
>>>  
>>>  	write_gdt_entry(get_cpu_gdt_rw(cpu), GDT_ENTRY_PERCPU, &d, DESCTYPE_S);
>>> -#endif
>>>  }
> 
>> This won't work on X86-32 because it actually uses the segment limit with fs: access. So there 
>> is a reason why the lsl based method is X86-64 only.
> 
> The limit will be consumed in X86-64 only, while the unification with i386 was suggested for a
> different reason.
> 
> Thanks,
> Chang
> 

The unification affects i386, and the limit is consumed by the processor with fs: access.
The limit was 0xFFFFF before, now it depends on the cpu/node. So accesses on small number cpus 
are likely to fault.

--Mika