[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <A7775E11-8837-4727-921A-C88566FA01AF@amacapital.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2020 16:50:32 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: "Yu, Yu-cheng" <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@...el.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Weijiang Yang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 6/9] x86/cet: Add PTRACE interface for CET
> On Sep 2, 2020, at 3:13 PM, Yu, Yu-cheng <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On 9/2/2020 1:03 PM, Jann Horn wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 2:30 AM Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com> wrote:
>>> Add REGSET_CET64/REGSET_CET32 to get/set CET MSRs:
>>>
>>> IA32_U_CET (user-mode CET settings) and
>>> IA32_PL3_SSP (user-mode Shadow Stack)
>> [...]
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/regset.c b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/regset.c
>> [...]
>>> +int cetregs_get(struct task_struct *target, const struct user_regset *regset,
>>> + struct membuf to)
>>> +{
>>> + struct fpu *fpu = &target->thread.fpu;
>>> + struct cet_user_state *cetregs;
>>> +
>>> + if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SHSTK))
>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>> +
>>> + fpu__prepare_read(fpu);
>>> + cetregs = get_xsave_addr(&fpu->state.xsave, XFEATURE_CET_USER);
>>> + if (!cetregs)
>>> + return -EFAULT;
>> Can this branch ever be hit without a kernel bug? If yes, I think
>> -EFAULT is probably a weird error code to choose here. If no, this
>> should probably use WARN_ON(). Same thing in cetregs_set().
>
> When a thread is not CET-enabled, its CET state does not exist. I looked at EFAULT, and it means "Bad address". Maybe this can be ENODEV, which means "No such device"?
>
> [...]
>
>>> @@ -1284,6 +1293,13 @@ static struct user_regset x86_32_regsets[] __ro_after_init = {
>> [...]
>>> + [REGSET_CET32] = {
>>> + .core_note_type = NT_X86_CET,
>>> + .n = sizeof(struct cet_user_state) / sizeof(u64),
>>> + .size = sizeof(u64), .align = sizeof(u64),
>>> + .active = cetregs_active, .regset_get = cetregs_get,
>>> + .set = cetregs_set
>>> + },
>>> };
>> Why are there different identifiers for 32-bit CET and 64-bit CET when
>> they operate on the same structs and have the same handlers? If
>> there's a good reason for that, the commit message should probably
>> point that out.
>
> Yes, the reason for two regsets is that fill_note_info() does not expect any holes in a regsets. I will put this in the commit log.
>
>
Perhaps we could fix that instead?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists