linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: drop unnecessary adrl

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: <DBBPR08MB4823463F759E2FFFE92BF9C8F8C60@DBBPR08MB4823.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 2 Apr 2020 17:50:04 +0000
From:   Peter Smith <Peter.Smith@....com>
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
CC:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, nd <nd@....com>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        "linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: drop unnecessary adrl





> On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 13:50, Peter Smith <Peter.Smith@....com> wrote:
> >
> > > I take it this implies that the LLVM linker does not support the
> > > R_ARM_ALU_PC_Gn relocations? Since otherwise, adrl could simply be
> > > expanded to a pair of adds with the appropriate relocations, letting
> > > the linker fix up the immediates (and the ADD vs SUB bits)
> >
> > Not at the moment. I have a patch in review to add the G0 variants for these in Arm state at reviews.llvm.org/D75349 . As far as I know LLVM MC does not have support for generating the relocations either. This could be added though. I agree that using the G* relocations with a pair of add/sub instructions would be the ideal solution. The adrl psuedo is essentially that but implemented at assembly time. I think it would be possible to implement in LLVM but at the time (4+ years ago) I wasn't confident in finding someone that would think that adrl support was worth the disruption, for example the current Arm assembly backend can only produce 1 instruction as output and adrl requires two.
> >
> > I'd be happy to look at group relocation support in LLD, I haven't got a lot of spare time so progress is likely to be slow though.
> >

> For Linux, I have proposed another approach in the past, which is to
> define a (Linux-local) adr_l macro with unlimited range [0], which
> basically comes down to place relative movw/movt pairs for v7+, and
> something along the lines of

>         ldr <reg>, 222f
> 111:    add <reg>, <reg>, pc
>         .subsection 1
> 222:    .long <sym> - (111b + 8)
>         .previous
>
> for v6 and earlier. Could you comment on whether Clang's integrated
> assembler could support anything like this?

Apologies for the delay in responding.

That looks like it should work. Empirically the following works in both Clang and GNU as. One potential problem here is that if the section is large and the subsections are dumped at the end the ldr is at risk of going out of range.

 .arm
 .macro mylongadrl reg, sym
 ldr \reg, 222f
111:    add \reg, \reg, pc
        .subsection 1
222:    .long \sym - (111b + 8)
 .previous
 .endm       

 .text
foo:     bx lr
bar:     bx lr
 mylongadrl r0 foo
 mylongadrl r0 bar

> Thanks,
> Ard.
>
>
>
> [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ardb/linux.git/commit/?h=arm-kaslr-latest&id=fd440f1131553a5201ce3b94905419bd067b93b3