| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20200824175022.GA1617698@ubuntu-n2-xlarge-x86>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:50:22 -0700
From: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
To: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/asm: Replace __force_order with memory clobber
On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 05:25:50PM -0400, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> The CRn accessor functions use __force_order as a dummy operand to
> prevent the compiler from reordering the inline asm.
>
> The fact that the asm is volatile should be enough to prevent this
> already, however older versions of GCC had a bug that could sometimes
> result in reordering. This was fixed in 8.1, 7.3 and 6.5.
>
> There are some issues with __force_order as implemented:
> - It is used only as an input operand for the write functions, and hence
> doesn't do anything additional to prevent reordering writes.
> - It allows memory accesses to be cached/reordered across write
> functions, but CRn writes affect the semantics of memory accesses, so
> this could be dangerous.
> - __force_order is not actually defined in the kernel proper, but the
> LLVM toolchain can in some cases require a definition: LLVM (as well
> as GCC 4.9) requires it for PIE code, which is why the compressed
> kernel has a definition, but also the clang integrated assembler may
> consider the address of __force_order to be significant, resulting in
> a reference that requires a definition.
>
> Fix this by:
> - Using a memory clobber for the write functions to additionally prevent
> caching/reordering memory accesses across CRn writes.
> - Using a dummy input operand with an arbitrary constant address for the
> read functions, instead of a global variable. This will prevent reads
> from being reordered across writes, while allowing memory loads to be
> cached/reordered across CRn reads, which should be safe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
> Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82602
I applied this patch to v5.9-rc2 and next-20200824 and built several
different configurations with clang + GNU as and some with clang +
LLVM's integrated assembler and saw no build failures.
Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/pgtable_64.c | 9 ---------
> arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h | 27 ++++++++++++++-------------
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 4 ++--
> 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/pgtable_64.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/pgtable_64.c
> index c8862696a47b..7d0394f4ebf9 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/pgtable_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/pgtable_64.c
> @@ -5,15 +5,6 @@
> #include "pgtable.h"
> #include "../string.h"
>
> -/*
> - * __force_order is used by special_insns.h asm code to force instruction
> - * serialization.
> - *
> - * It is not referenced from the code, but GCC < 5 with -fPIE would fail
> - * due to an undefined symbol. Define it to make these ancient GCCs work.
> - */
> -unsigned long __force_order;
> -
> #define BIOS_START_MIN 0x20000U /* 128K, less than this is insane */
> #define BIOS_START_MAX 0x9f000U /* 640K, absolute maximum */
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h
> index 59a3e13204c3..8f7791217ef4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h
> @@ -11,45 +11,46 @@
> #include <linux/jump_label.h>
>
> /*
> - * Volatile isn't enough to prevent the compiler from reordering the
> - * read/write functions for the control registers and messing everything up.
> - * A memory clobber would solve the problem, but would prevent reordering of
> - * all loads stores around it, which can hurt performance. Solution is to
> - * use a variable and mimic reads and writes to it to enforce serialization
> + * The compiler should not reorder volatile asm, however older versions of GCC
> + * had a bug (which was fixed in 8.1, 7.3 and 6.5) where they could sometimes
> + * reorder volatile asm. The write functions are not a problem since they have
> + * memory clobbers preventing reordering. To prevent reads from being reordered
> + * with respect to writes, use a dummy memory operand.
> */
> -extern unsigned long __force_order;
> +
> +#define __FORCE_ORDER "m"(*(unsigned int *)0x1000UL)
>
> void native_write_cr0(unsigned long val);
>
> static inline unsigned long native_read_cr0(void)
> {
> unsigned long val;
> - asm volatile("mov %%cr0,%0\n\t" : "=r" (val), "=m" (__force_order));
> + asm volatile("mov %%cr0,%0\n\t" : "=r" (val) : __FORCE_ORDER);
> return val;
> }
>
> static __always_inline unsigned long native_read_cr2(void)
> {
> unsigned long val;
> - asm volatile("mov %%cr2,%0\n\t" : "=r" (val), "=m" (__force_order));
> + asm volatile("mov %%cr2,%0\n\t" : "=r" (val) : __FORCE_ORDER);
> return val;
> }
>
> static __always_inline void native_write_cr2(unsigned long val)
> {
> - asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr2": : "r" (val), "m" (__force_order));
> + asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr2": : "r" (val) : "memory");
> }
>
> static inline unsigned long __native_read_cr3(void)
> {
> unsigned long val;
> - asm volatile("mov %%cr3,%0\n\t" : "=r" (val), "=m" (__force_order));
> + asm volatile("mov %%cr3,%0\n\t" : "=r" (val) : __FORCE_ORDER);
> return val;
> }
>
> static inline void native_write_cr3(unsigned long val)
> {
> - asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr3": : "r" (val), "m" (__force_order));
> + asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr3": : "r" (val) : "memory");
> }
>
> static inline unsigned long native_read_cr4(void)
> @@ -64,10 +65,10 @@ static inline unsigned long native_read_cr4(void)
> asm volatile("1: mov %%cr4, %0\n"
> "2:\n"
> _ASM_EXTABLE(1b, 2b)
> - : "=r" (val), "=m" (__force_order) : "0" (0));
> + : "=r" (val) : "0" (0), __FORCE_ORDER);
> #else
> /* CR4 always exists on x86_64. */
> - asm volatile("mov %%cr4,%0\n\t" : "=r" (val), "=m" (__force_order));
> + asm volatile("mov %%cr4,%0\n\t" : "=r" (val) : __FORCE_ORDER);
> #endif
> return val;
> }
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> index c5d6f17d9b9d..178499f90366 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> @@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ void native_write_cr0(unsigned long val)
> unsigned long bits_missing = 0;
>
> set_register:
> - asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr0": "+r" (val), "+m" (__force_order));
> + asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr0": "+r" (val) : : "memory");
>
> if (static_branch_likely(&cr_pinning)) {
> if (unlikely((val & X86_CR0_WP) != X86_CR0_WP)) {
> @@ -378,7 +378,7 @@ void native_write_cr4(unsigned long val)
> unsigned long bits_changed = 0;
>
> set_register:
> - asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr4": "+r" (val), "+m" (cr4_pinned_bits));
> + asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr4": "+r" (val) : : "memory");
>
> if (static_branch_likely(&cr_pinning)) {
> if (unlikely((val & cr4_pinned_mask) != cr4_pinned_bits)) {
> --
> 2.26.2
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clang Built Linux" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clang-built-linux+unsubscribe@...glegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/clang-built-linux/20200823212550.3377591-1-nivedita%40alum.mit.edu.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists