[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190308190333.dba7s7dg2aj2mpr4@treble>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 13:03:34 -0600
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
julien.thierry@....com, will.deacon@....com, luto@...capital.net,
mingo@...nel.org, catalin.marinas@....com, james.morse@....com,
valentin.schneider@....com, brgerst@...il.com, luto@...nel.org,
bp@...en8.de, dvlasenk@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dvyukov@...gle.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/20] x86/uaccess/xen: Suppress SMAP warnings
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 01:00:38PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 12:45:16PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > drivers/xen/privcmd.o: warning: objtool: privcmd_ioctl()+0x1414: call to hypercall_page() with UACCESS enabled
> >
> > Xen needs to do HV calls with AC=1 for hysterical raisins. Make the
> > warning go away.
> >
> > XXX: arguably we should rename ANNOTATE_NOSPEC_ALTERNATIVE to
> > ANNOTATE_IGNORE_ALTERNATIVE.
> >
> > Cc: andrew.cooper3@...rix.com
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h
> > @@ -214,6 +214,24 @@ xen_single_call(unsigned int call,
> > return (long)__res;
> > }
> >
> > +static __always_inline void __xen_stac(void)
> > +{
> > + /*
> > + * This is just about as horrible as this interface; we abuse the
> > + * nospec alternative annotation to supress objtool seeing the
> > + * STAC/CLAC and getting confused about it calling random code with
> > + * AC=1.
> > + */
> > + asm volatile(ANNOTATE_NOSPEC_ALTERNATIVE
> > + ASM_STAC ::: "memory", "flags");
> > +}
> > +
> > +static __always_inline void __xen_clac(void)
> > +{
> > + asm volatile(ANNOTATE_NOSPEC_ALTERNATIVE
> > + ASM_CLAC ::: "memory", "flags");
> > +}
> > +
>
> Shouldn't these be using SMAP-based alternatives like stac()/clac() do?
Also this you could get rid of the comment if there were an
ANNOTATE_AC_SAFE macro which does a similar thing.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists