linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 5/9] objtool: Add return address unwind hints

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: <ed46281f-46e5-10a0-1b61-60a54ea9d84e@oracle.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Apr 2020 21:27:27 +0200
From:   Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
        jthierry@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 5/9] objtool: Add return address unwind hints


On 4/14/20 8:42 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 08:31:23PM +0200, Alexandre Chartre wrote:
>> On 4/14/20 7:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
>>> So what actual problem is it solving?
>>>
>>
>> The return stack stuff is here to correctly handle intra-function call so that
>> we can figure out where the ret of an intra-function call should return. We
>> don't have this challenge with regular functions because we know that a ret
>> inside such function just indicates the end of the function.
>>
>> But when there's an intra-function call, a ret instruction can either:
>>    - continue after the intra-function call (if the stack was unchanged)
>>    - jump somewhere else (if the return address was changed) and eventually
>>      return to the next return address
>>    - indicate the end of the function (if the return address was removed).
>>
>> So, all this is needed to correctly follow the flow of the code and properly
>> record stack changes.
> 
> But which intra-function calls are you worried about here? The RSB
> stuffing ones we have to explicitly forget and the retpoline ones we
> can't follow because they're indirect calls.
> 
> So again, who cares about that stack?
> 

This provides a generic code to handle any intra-function call. Currently we have
the RSB stuffing ones which are forgotten with the UNWIND_HINT_TYPE_RADDR_DELETE
directive. And for retpoline, they will not return if we have an indirect jump
(JMP_NOSPEC) but they will return if we have an indirect call (CALL_NOSPEC). The
code can handle both cases. For example, if we were to have a CALL_NOSPEC invocation
which is not in an alternative then objtool can now correctly handle it.

alex.