linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] x86/entry fixes

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: <20200603181638.GD2627@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 3 Jun 2020 20:16:38 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] x86/entry fixes

On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 06:07:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 04:47:54PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:

> > With that in mind, you could whitelist "__ubsan_handle"-prefixed
> > functions in objtool. Given the __always_inline+noinstr+__ubsan_handle
> > case is quite rare, it might be reasonable.
> 
> Yes, I think so. Let me go have dinner and then I'll try and do a patch
> to that effect.

Here's a slightly more radical patch, it unconditionally allows UBSAN.

I've not actually boot tested this.. yet.

---
Subject: x86/entry, ubsan, objtool: Whitelist __ubsan_handle_*()
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Date: Wed Jun  3 20:09:06 CEST 2020

The UBSAN instrumentation only inserts external CALLs when things go
'BAD', much like WARN(). So treat them similar to WARN()s for noinstr,
that is: allow them, at the risk of taking the machine down, to get
their message out.

Suggested-by: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
 include/linux/compiler_types.h |    2 +-
 tools/objtool/check.c          |   28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/include/linux/compiler_types.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler_types.h
@@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ struct ftrace_likely_data {
 /* Section for code which can't be instrumented at all */
 #define noinstr								\
 	noinline notrace __attribute((__section__(".noinstr.text")))	\
-	__no_kcsan __no_sanitize_address __no_sanitize_undefined
+	__no_kcsan __no_sanitize_address
 
 #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
 
--- a/tools/objtool/check.c
+++ b/tools/objtool/check.c
@@ -2190,10 +2190,36 @@ static inline const char *call_dest_name
 	return "{dynamic}";
 }
 
+static inline bool noinstr_call_dest(struct symbol *func)
+{
+	/*
+	 * We can't deal with indirect function calls at present;
+	 * assume they're instrumented.
+	 */
+	if (!func)
+		return false;
+
+	/*
+	 * If the symbol is from a noinstr section; we good.
+	 */
+	if (func->sec->noinstr)
+		return true;
+
+	/*
+	 * The __ubsan_handle_*() calls are like WARN(), they only happen when
+	 * something 'BAD' happened. At the risk of taking the machine down,
+	 * let them proceed to get the message out.
+	 */
+	if (!strncmp(func->name, "__ubsan_handle_", 15))
+		return true;
+
+	return false;
+}
+
 static int validate_call(struct instruction *insn, struct insn_state *state)
 {
 	if (state->noinstr && state->instr <= 0 &&
-	    (!insn->call_dest || !insn->call_dest->sec->noinstr)) {
+	    !noinstr_call_dest(insn->call_dest)) {
 		WARN_FUNC("call to %s() leaves .noinstr.text section",
 				insn->sec, insn->offset, call_dest_name(insn));
 		return 1;