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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 07:56:53 -0600 From: shuah <shuah@...nel.org> To: "Tong, Bo" <bo.tong@...el.com>, "luto@...nel.org" <luto@...nel.org>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org> Cc: "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "skhan@...uxfoundation.org" <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, shuah <shuah@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] selftests/x86: Support Atom for syscall_arg_fault test Hi Bo, On 5/17/19 1:02 AM, Tong, Bo wrote: > Is this patch going to be merged? Or still any blocking issue there? > > Thanks, > Bo > > -----Original Message----- > From: shuah [mailto:shuah@...nel.org] > Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 10:05 PM > To: Tong, Bo <bo.tong@...el.com>; luto@...nel.org; x86@...nel.org > Cc: linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; skhan@...uxfoundation.org; shuah@...nel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] selftests/x86: Support Atom for syscall_arg_fault test > > On 4/19/19 1:10 AM, Tong Bo wrote: >> Atom-based CPUs trigger stack fault when invoke 32-bit SYSENTER >> instruction with invalid register values. So we also need SIGBUS handling in this case. >> >> Following is assembly when the fault exception happens. >> >> (gdb) disassemble $eip >> Dump of assembler code for function __kernel_vsyscall: >> 0xf7fd8fe0 <+0>: push %ecx >> 0xf7fd8fe1 <+1>: push %edx >> 0xf7fd8fe2 <+2>: push %ebp >> 0xf7fd8fe3 <+3>: mov %esp,%ebp >> 0xf7fd8fe5 <+5>: sysenter >> 0xf7fd8fe7 <+7>: int $0x80 >> => 0xf7fd8fe9 <+9>: pop %ebp >> 0xf7fd8fea <+10>: pop %edx >> 0xf7fd8feb <+11>: pop %ecx >> 0xf7fd8fec <+12>: ret >> End of assembler dump. >> >> According to Intel SDM, this could also be a Stack Segment Fault(#SS, >> 12), except a normal Page Fault(#PF, 14). Especially, in section 6.9 >> of Vol.3A, both stack and page faults are within the 10th(lowest >> priority) class, and as it said, "exceptions within each class are >> implementation-dependent and may vary from processor to processor". >> It's expected for processors like Intel Atom to trigger stack >> fault(SIGBUS), while we get page fault(SIGSEGV) from common Core processors. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tong Bo <bo.tong@...el.com> >> Acked-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/x86/syscall_arg_fault.c | 10 ++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/syscall_arg_fault.c >> b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/syscall_arg_fault.c >> index 7db4fc9..d2548401 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/syscall_arg_fault.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/syscall_arg_fault.c >> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ static sigjmp_buf jmpbuf; >> >> static volatile sig_atomic_t n_errs; >> >> -static void sigsegv(int sig, siginfo_t *info, void *ctx_void) >> +static void sigsegv_or_sigbus(int sig, siginfo_t *info, void >> +*ctx_void) >> { >> ucontext_t *ctx = (ucontext_t*)ctx_void; >> >> @@ -73,7 +73,13 @@ int main() >> if (sigaltstack(&stack, NULL) != 0) >> err(1, "sigaltstack"); >> >> - sethandler(SIGSEGV, sigsegv, SA_ONSTACK); >> + sethandler(SIGSEGV, sigsegv_or_sigbus, SA_ONSTACK); >> + /* >> + * The actual exception can vary. On Atom CPUs, we get #SS >> + * instead of #PF when the vDSO fails to access the stack when >> + * ESP is too close to 2^32, and #SS causes SIGBUS. >> + */ >> + sethandler(SIGBUS, sigsegv_or_sigbus, SA_ONSTACK); >> sethandler(SIGILL, sigill, SA_ONSTACK); >> >> /* >> > > In case there is a dependency on x86 tree, here is my Ack > > Acked-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org> > Looks like it got left behind in the confusion of which tree. I will apply this to my tree. thanks, -- Shuah
Powered by blists - more mailing lists