linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] x86/cpu: Use SERIALIZE in sync

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: <20200805191126.GA27509@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Aug 2020 12:11:26 -0700
From:   Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Cathy Zhang <cathy.zhang@...el.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        Kyung Min Park <kyung.min.park@...el.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-edac <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/cpu: Use SERIALIZE in sync_core() when available

On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 11:28:31AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 10:07 AM Ricardo Neri
> <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 07:08:08AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 09:58:25PM -0700, hpa@...or.com wrote:
> > > > Because why use an alternative to jump over one instruction?
> > > >
> > > > I personally would prefer to have the IRET put out of line
> > >
> > > Can't yet - SERIALIZE CPUs are a minority at the moment.
> > >
> > > > and have the call/jmp replaced by SERIALIZE inline.
> > >
> > > Well, we could do:
> > >
> > >       alternative_io("... IRET bunch", __ASM_SERIALIZE, X86_FEATURE_SERIALIZE, ...);
> > >
> > > and avoid all kinds of jumping. Alternatives get padded so there
> > > would be a couple of NOPs following when SERIALIZE gets patched in
> > > but it shouldn't be a problem. I guess one needs to look at what gcc
> > > generates...
> >
> > But the IRET-TO-SELF code has instruction which modify the stack. This
> > would violate stack invariance in alternatives as enforced in commit
> > 7117f16bf460 ("objtool: Fix ORC vs alternatives"). As a result, objtool
> > gives warnings as follows:
> >
> > arch/x86/kernel/alternative.o: warning: objtool: do_sync_core()+0xe:
> > alternative modifies stack
> >
> > Perhaps in this specific case it does not matter as the changes in the
> > stack will be undone by IRET. However, using alternative_io would require
> > adding the macro STACK_FRAME_NON_STANDARD to functions using sync_core().
> > IMHO, it wouldn't look good.
> >
> > So maybe the best approach is to implement as you suggested using
> > static_cpu_has()?
> 
> I agree.  Let's keep it simple.
> 
> Honestly, I think the right solution is to have iret_to_self() in
> actual asm and invoke it from C as needed. 

Do you mean anything different from what we have already [1]? If I
understand your comment correctly, we have exactly that: an
iret_to_self() asm implementation invoked from C.

Thanks and BR,
Ricardo

[1]. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200727043132.15082-4-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com/

Thanks and BR,
Ricardo