linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] gcc-plugins/stackleak: Use asm instrumentation to avoid useless register saving

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 10 Jun 2020 18:47:14 +0300
From:   Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
        Sven Schnelle <svens@...ckframe.org>,
        Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
        Naohiro Aota <naohiro.aota@....com>,
        Alexander Monakov <amonakov@...ras.ru>,
        Mathias Krause <minipli@...glemail.com>,
        PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>,
        Brad Spengler <spender@...ecurity.net>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gcc@....gnu.org, notify@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] gcc-plugins/stackleak: Use asm instrumentation to
 avoid useless register saving

On 09.06.2020 21:46, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 04:49:54PM +0300, Alexander Popov wrote:
>> Let's improve the instrumentation to avoid this:
>>
>> 1. Make stackleak_track_stack() save all register that it works with.
>> Use no_caller_saved_registers attribute for that function. This attribute
>> is available for x86_64 and i386 starting from gcc-7.
>>
>> 2. Insert calling stackleak_track_stack() in asm:
>>   asm volatile("call stackleak_track_stack" :: "r" (current_stack_pointer))
>> Here we use ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT trick from arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h.
>> The input constraint is taken into account during gcc shrink-wrapping
>> optimization. It is needed to be sure that stackleak_track_stack() call is
>> inserted after the prologue of the containing function, when the stack
>> frame is prepared.
> 
> Very cool; nice work!
> 
>> +static void add_stack_tracking(gimple_stmt_iterator *gsi)
>> +{
>> +	/*
>> +	 * The 'no_caller_saved_registers' attribute is used for
>> +	 * stackleak_track_stack(). If the compiler supports this attribute for
>> +	 * the target arch, we can add calling stackleak_track_stack() in asm.
>> +	 * That improves performance: we avoid useless operations with the
>> +	 * caller-saved registers in the functions from which we will remove
>> +	 * stackleak_track_stack() call during the stackleak_cleanup pass.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (lookup_attribute_spec(get_identifier("no_caller_saved_registers")))
>> +		add_stack_tracking_gasm(gsi);
>> +	else
>> +		add_stack_tracking_gcall(gsi);
>> +}
> 
> The build_for_x86 flag is only ever used as an assert() test against
> no_caller_saved_registers, but we're able to test for that separately.
> Why does the architecture need to be tested? (i.e. when this flag
> becomes supported o other architectures, why must it still be x86-only?)

The inline asm statement that is used for instrumentation is arch-specific.
Trying to add
  asm volatile("call stackleak_track_stack")
in gcc plugin on aarch64 makes gcc break spectacularly.
I pass the target arch name to the plugin and check it explicitly to avoid that.

Moreover, I'm going to create a gcc enhancement request for supporting
no_caller_saved_registers attribute on aarch64.

Best regards,
Alexander