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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 03:04:18 +0200 From: andi@...much.email To: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com> Cc: Brendan Shanks <bshanks@...eweavers.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>, Babu Moger <Babu.Moger@....com>, Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>, Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: umip: AMD Ryzen 3900X, pagefault after emulate SLDT/SIDT instruction On 12:43 19.05.20, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > > Running the same executable on the exact same kernel (and userland) but > > > on a Intel i7-8565U doesn't crash at this point. I am guessing the > > > emulation is supposed to do something different on AMD CPUs? > > I am surprised you don't see it on the Intel processor. Maybe it does > not have UMIP. Do you see umip when you do > > $ grep umip /proc/cpuinfo Indeed it doesn't ahve the feature. I would have assumed that it is recent enough. Apparently not. > > > On the Ryzen the code executes successfully after setting CONFIG_X86_UMIP=n. > > > > Hi Andreas, > > > > The problem is that the kernel does not emulate/spoof the SLDT instruction, only SGDT, SIDT, and SMSW. > > SLDT and STR weren't thought to be commonly used, so emulation/spoofing wasn’t added. > > In the last few months I have seen reports of one or two (32-bit) Windows games that use SLDT though. > > Can you share more information about the application you’re running? > > > > Maybe the best path is to add kernel emulation/spoofing for SLDT and STR on 32 and 64-bit, just to cover all the cases. It should be a pretty simple patch, I’ll start working on it. > > I have a patch for this already that I wrote for testing purposes: > > https://github.com/ricardon/tip/commit/1692889cb3f8accb523d44b682458e234b93be50 > > Perhaps it can be used as a starting point? Not sure what the spoofing > value should be, though. Perhaps 0? I am not entirely sure what it should return in the general case. My assumption is that 0 might work. Maybe making it configurable like with the other UMIP constants that I saw? I'll give the patch a shot and try to figure out what the authors of the code have to say about it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists