[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202004231053.5E4F16C3E8@keescook>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 11:06:14 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 22 (objtool warnings)
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:44:06AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 08:35:29AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On 4/22/20 12:10 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Changes since 20200421:
> > >
> >
> > on x86_64:
>
> In both cases the unreachable instruction happens immediately after a
> call to a function which is truncated with a UD2 (because of
> UBSAN_TRAP).
>
> When I remove UBSAN_TRAP, the UD2s are replaced with calls to
> __ubsan_handle_type_mismatch_v1().
Hrm, these are coming out of CONFIG_UBSAN_MISC, yes? It seems that the
UBSAN checks that are non-recoverable all inject unreachable checks
afterwards, from what I can see.
> Kees, any idea?
Isn't this another version of the earlier unreachable-ud2 issue?
Regardless, the type_mismatch it triggered for misalignment and
object-size checks, and the alignment check is likely going to always
misfire on x86. The randconfig includes that config:
CONFIG_UBSAN_ALIGNMENT=y
So perhaps the config should be strengthened to disallow it under
COMPILE_TEST?
config UBSAN_ALIGNMENT
def_bool !UBSAN_NO_ALIGNMENT
depends on !COMPILE_TEST
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists