linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 04/11] x86/entry/64: Adapt assembly for PIE support

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]

Date:   Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:01:50 -0800
From:   Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...omium.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 04/11] x86/entry/64: Adapt assembly for PIE support

On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 1:04 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 04:09:41PM -0800, Thomas Garnier wrote:
>
> > @@ -1625,7 +1627,11 @@ first_nmi:
> >       addq    $8, (%rsp)      /* Fix up RSP */
> >       pushfq                  /* RFLAGS */
> >       pushq   $__KERNEL_CS    /* CS */
> > -     pushq   $1f             /* RIP */
> > +     pushq   $0              /* Future return address */
>
> We're building an IRET frame, the IRET frame does not have a 'future
> return address' field.

I assumed that's the target RIP after iretq.

>
> > +     pushq   %rdx            /* Save RAX */
>
> fail..

Yes, sorry. I was asked to switch from RAX to RDX and missed the comment.

>
> > +     leaq    1f(%rip), %rdx  /* RIP */
>
> nonsensical comment

That was the same comment from the push $1f that I changed.

>
> > +     movq    %rdx, 8(%rsp)   /* Put 1f on return address */
> > +     popq    %rdx            /* Restore RAX */
>
> fail..

I will change in next iteration.

>
> >       iretq                   /* continues at repeat_nmi below */
> >       UNWIND_HINT_IRET_REGS
> >  1:
> > --
> > 2.24.0.393.g34dc348eaf-goog
> >