[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190905092627.GB2332@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 11:26:27 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH -tip 0/2] x86: Prohibit kprobes on
XEN_EMULATE_PREFIX
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 09:53:32AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 05/09/2019 09:26, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 08:54:17AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >
> >> I don't know if you've spotted, but the prefix is a ud2a instruction
> >> followed by 'xen' in ascii.
> >>
> >> The KVM version was added in c/s 6c86eedc206dd1f9d37a2796faa8e6f2278215d2
> > While the Xen one disassebles to valid instructions, that KVM one does
> > not:
> >
> > .text
> > xen:
> > ud2; .ascii "xen"
> > kvm:
> > ud2; .ascii "kvm"
> >
> > disassembles like:
> >
> > 0000000000000000 <xen>:
> > 0: 0f 0b ud2
> > 2: 78 65 js 69 <kvm+0x64>
> > 4: 6e outsb %ds:(%rsi),(%dx)
> > 0000000000000005 <kvm>:
> > 5: 0f 0b ud2
> > 7: 6b .byte 0x6b
> > 8: 76 6d jbe 77 <kvm+0x72>
> >
> > Which is a bit unfortunate I suppose. At least they don't appear to
> > consume further bytes.
>
> It does when you give objdump one extra byte to look at.
>
> 0000000000000005 <kvm>:
> 5: 0f 0b ud2
> 7: 6b 76 6d 00 imul $0x0,0x6d(%rsi),%esi
>
> I did try to point out that this property should have been checked
> before settling on 'kvm' as the string.
Bah you're right; when I write:
ud2; .ascii "kvm"; cpuid
The output is gibberish :/
> but we're 13 years too late to amend this.
Yah, I figured :/
> > I know it is water under the bridge at this point; but you could've used
> > UD1 with a displacement with some 'unlikely' values. That way it
> > would've decoded to a single instruction.
> >
> > Something like:
> >
> > ud1 0x6e6578(%rax),%rax
> >
> > which spells out "xen\0" in the displacement:
> >
> > 48 0f b9 80 78 65 6e 00
>
> :)
>
> I seem to recall UD0 and UD1 being very late to the documentation party.
They were; and the documentation for still UD0 differs between vendors :/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists