linux-kernel - Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference in handle_external_interrupt

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAG_fn=Uf2dDo4K9X==wE=eL8HQMc1an8m8H18tvWd9Mkyhpskg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Mar 2020 19:06:37 +0100
From:   Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        syzbot <syzbot+3f29ca2efb056a761e38@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference in handle_external_interrupt_irqoff

On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:55 PM Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> I've reduced the faulty test case to the following code:
>
> =================================
> a;
> long b;
> register unsigned long current_stack_pointer asm("rsp");
> handle_external_interrupt_irqoff() {
>   asm("and $0xfffffffffffffff0, %%rsp\n\tpush $%c[ss]\n\tpush "
>       "%[sp]\n\tpushf\n\tpushq $%c[cs]\n\tcall *%[thunk_target]\n"
>       : [ sp ] "=&r"(b), "+r" (current_stack_pointer)
>       : [ thunk_target ] "rm"(a), [ ss ] "i"(3 * 8), [ cs ] "i"(2 * 8) );
> }
> =================================
> (in fact creduce even throws away current_stack_pointer, but we
> probably want to keep it to prove the point).
>
> Clang generates the following code for it:
>
> $ clang vmx.i -O2 -c -w -o vmx.o
> $ objdump -d vmx.o
> ...
> 0000000000000000 <handle_external_interrupt_irqoff>:
>    0: 8b 05 00 00 00 00    mov    0x0(%rip),%eax        # 6
> <handle_external_interrupt_irqoff+0x6>
>    6: 89 44 24 fc          mov    %eax,-0x4(%rsp)
>    a: 48 83 e4 f0          and    $0xfffffffffffffff0,%rsp
>    e: 6a 18                pushq  $0x18
>   10: 50                    push   %rax
>   11: 9c                    pushfq
>   12: 6a 10                pushq  $0x10
>   14: ff 54 24 fc          callq  *-0x4(%rsp)
>   18: 48 89 05 00 00 00 00 mov    %rax,0x0(%rip)        # 1f
> <handle_external_interrupt_irqoff+0x1f>
>   1f: c3                    retq
>
> The question is whether using current_stack_pointer as an output is
> actually a valid way to tell the compiler it should not clobber RSP.
> Intuitively it is, but explicitly adding RSP to the clobber list
> sounds a bit more bulletproof.

Ok, I am wrong: according to
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html it's incorrect to
list RSP in the clobber list.