linux-kernel - Re: objtool warning "uses BP as a scratch register" with clang-9

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: <20190828152226.r6pl64ij5kol6d4p@treble>
Date:   Wed, 28 Aug 2019 10:22:26 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Ilie Halip <ilie.halip@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: objtool warning "uses BP as a scratch register" with clang-9

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:13:59PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:00 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:22 PM 'Nick Desaulniers' via Clang Built Linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com> wrote:
> I figured this one out as well:
> 
> > http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/XjdDsypRxX/
> > 0x5BA1B7A1:arch/x86/ia32/ia32_signal.o: warning: objtool:
> > ia32_setup_rt_frame()+0x238: call to memset() with UACCESS enabled
> > 0x5BA1B7A1:arch/x86/kernel/signal.o: warning: objtool:
> > __setup_rt_frame()+0x5b8: call to memset() with UACCESS enabled
> 
> When CONFIG_KASAN is set, clang decides to use memset() to set
> the first two struct members in this function:
> 
>  static inline void sas_ss_reset(struct task_struct *p)
>  {
>         p->sas_ss_sp = 0;
>         p->sas_ss_size = 0;
>         p->sas_ss_flags = SS_DISABLE;
>  }
> 
> and that is called from save_altstack_ex(). Adding a barrier() after
> the sas_ss_sp() works around the issue, but is certainly not the
> best solution. Any other ideas?

Wow, is the compiler allowed to insert memset calls like that?  Seems a
bit overbearing, at least in a kernel context.  I don't recall GCC ever
doing it.

-- 
Josh