[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d0e4077e-129f-6823-dcea-a101ef626e8c@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 09:47:55 -0700
From: "Yu, Yu-cheng" <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <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>,
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>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.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>,
Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 8/8] x86/vsyscall/64: Fixup Shadow Stack and Indirect
Branch Tracking for vsyscall emulation
On 9/25/2020 9:31 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 7:58 AM Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com> wrote:
>>
[...]
>> @@ -286,6 +289,37 @@ bool emulate_vsyscall(unsigned long error_code,
>> /* Emulate a ret instruction. */
>> regs->ip = caller;
>> regs->sp += 8;
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_CET
>> + if (tsk->thread.cet.shstk_size || tsk->thread.cet.ibt_enabled) {
>> + struct cet_user_state *cet;
>> + struct fpu *fpu;
>> +
>> + fpu = &tsk->thread.fpu;
>> + fpregs_lock();
>> +
>> + if (!test_thread_flag(TIF_NEED_FPU_LOAD)) {
>> + copy_fpregs_to_fpstate(fpu);
>> + set_thread_flag(TIF_NEED_FPU_LOAD);
>> + }
>> +
>> + cet = get_xsave_addr(&fpu->state.xsave, XFEATURE_CET_USER);
>> + if (!cet) {
>> + fpregs_unlock();
>> + goto sigsegv;
>
> I *think* your patchset tries to keep cet.shstk_size and
> cet.ibt_enabled in sync with the MSR, in which case it should be
> impossible to get here, but a comment and a warning would be much
> better than a random sigsegv.
Yes, it should be impossible to get here. I will add a comment and a
warning, but still do sigsegv. Should this happen, and the function
return, the app gets a control-protection fault. Why not let it fail early?
>
> Shouldn't we have a get_xsave_addr_or_allocate() that will never
> return NULL but instead will mark the state as in use and set up the
> init state if the feature was previously not in use?
>
We already have a static __raw_xsave_addr(), which returns a pointer to
the requested xstate. Maybe we can export __raw_xsave_addr(), if that
is needed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists