| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20190423203627.mwnaknit7cvr3l5l@treble>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:36:27 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Raphael Gault <raphael.gault@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
peterz@...radead.org, catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
julien.thierry@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/6] objtool: arm64: Adapt the stack frame checks and the
section analysis for the arm architecture
On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 02:52:40PM +0100, Raphael Gault wrote:
> Since the way the initial stack frame when entering a function is different that what is done
> in the x86_64 architecture, we need to add some more check to support the different cases.
> As opposed as for x86_64, the return address is not stored by the call instruction but is instead
> loaded in a register. The initial stack frame is thus empty when entering a function and 2 push
> operations are needed to set it up correctly. All the different combinations need to be
> taken into account.
>
> On arm64, the .altinstr_replacement section is not flagged as containing executable instructions
> but we still need to process it.
>
> Switch tables are alse stored in a different way on arm64 than on x86_64 so we need to be able
> to identify in which case we are when looking for it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Raphael Gault <raphael.gault@....com>
> ---
> tools/objtool/arch.h | 2 +
> tools/objtool/arch/arm64/decode.c | 27 +++++++++
> tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.c | 5 ++
> tools/objtool/check.c | 95 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> tools/objtool/elf.c | 3 +-
> 5 files changed, 120 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/objtool/arch.h b/tools/objtool/arch.h
> index 0eff166ca613..f3bef3f2cef3 100644
> --- a/tools/objtool/arch.h
> +++ b/tools/objtool/arch.h
> @@ -88,4 +88,6 @@ unsigned long arch_compute_jump_destination(struct instruction *insn);
>
> unsigned long arch_compute_rela_sym_offset(int addend);
>
> +bool arch_is_insn_sibling_call(struct instruction *insn);
> +
> #endif /* _ARCH_H */
> diff --git a/tools/objtool/arch/arm64/decode.c b/tools/objtool/arch/arm64/decode.c
> index 0feb3ae3af5d..8b293eae2b38 100644
> --- a/tools/objtool/arch/arm64/decode.c
> +++ b/tools/objtool/arch/arm64/decode.c
> @@ -105,6 +105,33 @@ unsigned long arch_compute_rela_sym_offset(int addend)
> return addend;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * In order to know if we are in presence of a sibling
> + * call and not in presence of a switch table we look
> + * back at the previous instructions and see if we are
> + * jumping inside the same function that we are already
> + * in.
> + */
> +bool arch_is_insn_sibling_call(struct instruction *insn)
> +{
> + struct instruction *prev;
> + struct list_head *l;
> + struct symbol *sym;
> + list_for_each_prev(l, &insn->list) {
> + prev = (void *)l;
> + if (!prev->func
> + || prev->func->pfunc != insn->func->pfunc)
> + return false;
> + if (prev->stack_op.src.reg != ADR_SOURCE)
> + continue;
> + sym = find_symbol_containing(insn->sec, insn->immediate);
> + if (!sym || sym->type != STT_FUNC
> + || sym->pfunc != insn->func->pfunc)
> + return true;
> + break;
> + }
> + return true;
> +}
I get the feeling there might be a better way to do this, but I can't
figure out what this function is actually doing. It looks like it
searches backwards in the function for an instruction which has
stack_op.src.reg != ADR_SOURCE -- what does that mean? And why doesn't
it do anything with the instruction after it finds it?
> static int is_arm64(struct elf *elf)
> {
> switch(elf->ehdr.e_machine){
> diff --git a/tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.c b/tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.c
> index 1af7b4996307..88c3d99c76be 100644
> --- a/tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.c
> +++ b/tools/objtool/arch/x86/decode.c
> @@ -85,6 +85,11 @@ unsigned long arch_compute_rela_sym_offset(int addend)
> return addend + 4;
> }
>
> +bool arch_is_insn_sibling_call(struct instruction *insn)
> +{
> + return true;
> +}
All x86 instructions are sibling calls?
> +
> int arch_orc_read_unwind_hints(struct objtool_file *file)
> {
> struct section *sec, *relasec;
> diff --git a/tools/objtool/check.c b/tools/objtool/check.c
> index 17fcd8c8f9c1..fa6106214318 100644
> --- a/tools/objtool/check.c
> +++ b/tools/objtool/check.c
> @@ -261,10 +261,12 @@ static int decode_instructions(struct objtool_file *file)
> unsigned long offset;
> struct instruction *insn;
> int ret;
> + static int composed_insn = 0;
>
> for_each_sec(file, sec) {
>
> - if (!(sec->sh.sh_flags & SHF_EXECINSTR))
> + if (!(sec->sh.sh_flags & SHF_EXECINSTR)
> + && (strcmp(sec->name, ".altinstr_replacement") || !IGNORE_SHF_EXEC_FLAG))
> continue;
We should just fix the root cause instead, presumably:
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative.h
index b9f8d787eea9..e9e6b81e3eb4 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative.h
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ static inline void apply_alternatives_module(void *start, size_t length) { }
ALTINSTR_ENTRY(feature,cb) \
".popsection\n" \
" .if " __stringify(cb) " == 0\n" \
- ".pushsection .altinstr_replacement, \"a\"\n" \
+ ".pushsection .altinstr_replacement, \"ax\"\n" \
"663:\n\t" \
newinstr "\n" \
"664:\n\t" \
>
> if (strcmp(sec->name, ".altinstr_replacement") &&
> @@ -297,10 +299,22 @@ static int decode_instructions(struct objtool_file *file)
> WARN_FUNC("invalid instruction type %d",
> insn->sec, insn->offset, insn->type);
> ret = -1;
> - goto err;
> + free(insn);
> + continue;
What's the purpose of this change? If it's really needed then it looks
like it should be a separate patch.
> }
> -
> - hash_add(file->insn_hash, &insn->hash, insn->offset);
> + /*
> + * For arm64 architecture, we sometime split instructions so that
> + * we can track the state evolution (i.e. load/store of pairs of registers).
> + * We thus need to take both into account and not erase the previous ones.
> + */
Ew... Is this an architectural thing, or just a quirk of the arm64
decoder?
> + if (composed_insn > 0)
> + hash_add(file->insn_hash, &insn->hash, insn->offset + composed_insn);
> + else
> + hash_add(file->insn_hash, &insn->hash, insn->offset);
> + if (insn->len == 0)
> + composed_insn++;
> + else
> + composed_insn = 0;
> list_add_tail(&insn->list, &file->insn_list);
> }
>
> @@ -510,10 +524,10 @@ static int add_jump_destinations(struct objtool_file *file)
> dest_off = arch_compute_jump_destination(insn);
> } else if (rela->sym->type == STT_SECTION) {
> dest_sec = rela->sym->sec;
> - dest_off = rela->addend + 4;
> + dest_off = arch_compute_rela_sym_offset(rela->addend);
> } else if (rela->sym->sec->idx) {
> dest_sec = rela->sym->sec;
> - dest_off = rela->sym->sym.st_value + rela->addend + 4;
> + dest_off = rela->sym->sym.st_value + arch_compute_rela_sym_offset(rela->addend);
> } else if (strstr(rela->sym->name, "_indirect_thunk_")) {
> /*
> * Retpoline jumps are really dynamic jumps in
> @@ -663,7 +677,7 @@ static int handle_group_alt(struct objtool_file *file,
> last_orig_insn = insn;
> }
>
> - if (next_insn_same_sec(file, last_orig_insn)) {
> + if (last_orig_insn && next_insn_same_sec(file, last_orig_insn)) {
This might belong in a separate patch which explains the reason for the
change.
> fake_jump = malloc(sizeof(*fake_jump));
> if (!fake_jump) {
> WARN("malloc failed");
> @@ -976,6 +990,17 @@ static struct rela *find_switch_table(struct objtool_file *file,
> if (find_symbol_containing(rodata_sec, table_offset))
> continue;
>
> + /*
> + * If we are on arm64 architecture, we now that we
"know"
> + * are in presence of a switch table thanks to
> + * the `br <Xn>` insn. but we can't retrieve it yet.
> + * So we just ignore unreachable for this file.
> + */
> + if (JUMP_DYNAMIC_IS_SWITCH_TABLE) {
> + file->ignore_unreachables = true;
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
I think this means switch table reading is not yet supported? If so
then maybe the flag should be called SWITCH_TABLE_NOT_SUPPORTED.
But really this needs to be fixed anyway before merging the code.
> rodata_rela = find_rela_by_dest(rodata_sec, table_offset);
> if (rodata_rela) {
> /*
> @@ -1258,8 +1283,8 @@ static void save_reg(struct insn_state *state, unsigned char reg, int base,
>
> static void restore_reg(struct insn_state *state, unsigned char reg)
> {
> - state->regs[reg].base = CFI_UNDEFINED;
> - state->regs[reg].offset = 0;
> + state->regs[reg].base = initial_func_cfi.regs[reg].base;
> + state->regs[reg].offset = initial_func_cfi.regs[reg].offset;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -1415,8 +1440,33 @@ static int update_insn_state(struct instruction *insn, struct insn_state *state)
>
> /* add imm, %rsp */
> state->stack_size -= op->src.offset;
> - if (cfa->base == CFI_SP)
> + if (cfa->base == CFI_SP) {
> cfa->offset -= op->src.offset;
> + if (state->stack_size == 0
> + && initial_func_cfi.cfa.base == CFI_CFA) {
> + cfa->base = CFI_CFA;
> + cfa->offset = 0;
> + }
> + }
> + /*
> + * on arm64 the save/restore of sp into fp is not automatic
> + * and the first one can be done without the other so we
> + * need to be careful not to invalidate the stack frame in such
> + * cases.
> + */
> + else if (cfa->base == CFI_BP) {
> + if (state->stack_size == 0
> + && initial_func_cfi.cfa.base == CFI_CFA) {
> + cfa->base = CFI_CFA;
> + cfa->offset = 0;
> + restore_reg(state, CFI_BP);
> + }
> + }
> + else if (cfa->base == CFI_CFA) {
> + cfa->base = CFI_SP;
> + if (state->stack_size >= 16)
> + cfa->offset = 16;
> + }
> break;
> }
>
> @@ -1427,6 +1477,16 @@ static int update_insn_state(struct instruction *insn, struct insn_state *state)
> break;
> }
>
> + if (op->src.reg == CFI_SP && op->dest.reg == CFI_BP &&
> + cfa->base == CFI_SP &&
> + regs[CFI_BP].base == CFI_CFA &&
> + regs[CFI_BP].offset == -cfa->offset) {
> +
> + /* mov %rsp, %rbp */
> + cfa->base = op->dest.reg;
> + state->bp_scratch = false;
> + break;
> + }
> if (op->src.reg == CFI_SP && cfa->base == CFI_SP) {
>
> /* drap: lea disp(%rsp), %drap */
> @@ -1518,6 +1578,9 @@ static int update_insn_state(struct instruction *insn, struct insn_state *state)
> state->stack_size -= 8;
> if (cfa->base == CFI_SP)
> cfa->offset -= 8;
> + if (cfa->base == CFI_SP && cfa->offset == 0
> + && initial_func_cfi.cfa.base == CFI_CFA)
> + cfa->base = CFI_CFA;
>
> break;
>
> @@ -1557,6 +1620,8 @@ static int update_insn_state(struct instruction *insn, struct insn_state *state)
>
> case OP_DEST_PUSH:
> state->stack_size += 8;
> + if (cfa->base == CFI_CFA)
> + cfa->base = CFI_SP;
> if (cfa->base == CFI_SP)
> cfa->offset += 8;
>
> @@ -1728,7 +1793,7 @@ static int validate_branch(struct objtool_file *file, struct instruction *first,
> insn = first;
> sec = insn->sec;
>
> - if (insn->alt_group && list_empty(&insn->alts)) {
> + if (!insn->visited && insn->alt_group && list_empty(&insn->alts)) {
Why? This looks like another one that might belong in a separate patch.
> WARN_FUNC("don't know how to handle branch to middle of alternative instruction group",
> sec, insn->offset);
> return 1;
> @@ -1871,6 +1936,14 @@ static int validate_branch(struct objtool_file *file, struct instruction *first,
> case INSN_JUMP_DYNAMIC:
> if (func && list_empty(&insn->alts) &&
> has_modified_stack_frame(&state)) {
> + /*
> + * On arm64 `br <Xn>` insn can be used for switch-tables
> + * but it cannot be distinguished in itself from a sibling
> + * call thus we need to have a look at the previous instructions
> + * to determine which it is
> + */
> + if (!arch_is_insn_sibling_call(insn))
> + break;
> WARN_FUNC("sibling call from callable instruction with modified stack frame",
> sec, insn->offset);
> return 1;
> diff --git a/tools/objtool/elf.c b/tools/objtool/elf.c
> index b8f3cca8e58b..136f9b9fb1d1 100644
> --- a/tools/objtool/elf.c
> +++ b/tools/objtool/elf.c
> @@ -74,7 +74,8 @@ struct symbol *find_symbol_by_offset(struct section *sec, unsigned long offset)
> struct symbol *sym;
>
> list_for_each_entry(sym, &sec->symbol_list, list)
> - if (sym->type != STT_SECTION &&
> + if (sym->type != STT_NOTYPE &&
> + sym->type != STT_SECTION &&
Why? Another potential separate patch.
> sym->offset == offset)
> return sym;
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists