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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 20:23:39 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com> Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, jpoimboe@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org, mbenes@...e.cz, jthierry@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/17] objtool: Better handle IRET On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 07:37:32PM +0200, Alexandre Chartre wrote: > > @@ -2243,6 +2232,20 @@ static int validate_branch(struct objtoo > > break; > > + case INSN_EXCEPTION_RETURN: > > + if (handle_insn_ops(insn, &state)) > > + return 1; > > Do we need to update the stack state for normal IRET? This wasn't done before. > So shouldn't this better be: > > case INSN_EXCEPTION_RETURN: > if (!func) > return 0; > > if (handle_insn_ops(insn, &state)) > return 1; > > break; Well, I was going to do the unconditional handle_insn_ops(), like mentioned, but then that intra_function_call thing spoiled it. It doesn't matter though; STT_NOTYPE doesn't care. > > + > > + /* > > + * This handles x86's sync_core() case, where we use an > > + * IRET to self. All 'normal' IRET instructions are in > > + * STT_NOTYPE entry symbols. > > + */ > > + if (func) > > + break; > > Is it worth checking that func->name is effectively "sync_core"? It's an inline..
Powered by blists - more mailing lists