linux-kernel - Re: [REGRESSION 5.8] x86/entry: DR0 break-on-write not working

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: <20200820034636.tl4nq5aiitpfvx62@treble>
Date:   Wed, 19 Aug 2020 22:46:36 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
        Robert O'Callahan <rocallahan@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION 5.8] x86/entry: DR0 break-on-write not working

On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 05:14:18PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 3:47 PM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > What amazes me is that it successfully schedules back to the end of the
> > #DB handler finish and everything keeps working.
> >
> > Do we not have assertions in the scheduler to catch this?
> 
> You almost nailed it.
> 
> I'm pretty sure you have the buggy sequence of events right, but for
> the wrong reason.  There's nothing wrong with scheduling when
> delivering SIGTRAP, but it's definitely wrong to blindly save and
> restore DR7 around scheduling and around ptrace invocations.  Remember
> this is an entry from user mode, so it runs on the user stack.

Wow, I had no idea user #DB's run on the task stack.  The scheduling
from #DB blew my mind :-)  What's the purpose of that?

-- 
Josh