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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20201014212631.207844-1-nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Date:   Wed, 14 Oct 2020 17:26:31 -0400
From:   Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] compiler.h: Fix barrier_data() on clang

Commit
  815f0ddb346c ("include/linux/compiler*.h: make compiler-*.h mutually exclusive")

neglected to copy barrier_data() from compiler-gcc.h into
compiler-clang.h. The definition in compiler-gcc.h was really to work
around clang's more aggressive optimization, so this broke
barrier_data() on clang, and consequently memzero_explicit() as well.

For example, this results in at least the memzero_explicit() call in
lib/crypto/sha256.c:sha256_transform() being optimized away by clang.

Fix this by moving the definition of barrier_data() into compiler.h.

Also move the gcc/clang definition of barrier() into compiler.h,
__memory_barrier() is icc-specific (and barrier() is already defined
using it in compiler-intel.h) and doesn't belong in compiler.h.

Signed-off-by: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Fixes: 815f0ddb346c ("include/linux/compiler*.h: make compiler-*.h mutually exclusive")
---
 include/linux/compiler-clang.h |  6 ------
 include/linux/compiler-gcc.h   | 19 -------------------
 include/linux/compiler.h       | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/compiler-clang.h b/include/linux/compiler-clang.h
index cee0c728d39a..04c0a5a717f7 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler-clang.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler-clang.h
@@ -52,12 +52,6 @@
 #define COMPILER_HAS_GENERIC_BUILTIN_OVERFLOW 1
 #endif
 
-/* The following are for compatibility with GCC, from compiler-gcc.h,
- * and may be redefined here because they should not be shared with other
- * compilers, like ICC.
- */
-#define barrier() __asm__ __volatile__("" : : : "memory")
-
 #if __has_feature(shadow_call_stack)
 # define __noscs	__attribute__((__no_sanitize__("shadow-call-stack")))
 #endif
diff --git a/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h b/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h
index 7a3769040d7d..fda30ffb037b 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h
@@ -15,25 +15,6 @@
 # error Sorry, your compiler is too old - please upgrade it.
 #endif
 
-/* Optimization barrier */
-
-/* The "volatile" is due to gcc bugs */
-#define barrier() __asm__ __volatile__("": : :"memory")
-/*
- * This version is i.e. to prevent dead stores elimination on @ptr
- * where gcc and llvm may behave differently when otherwise using
- * normal barrier(): while gcc behavior gets along with a normal
- * barrier(), llvm needs an explicit input variable to be assumed
- * clobbered. The issue is as follows: while the inline asm might
- * access any memory it wants, the compiler could have fit all of
- * @ptr into memory registers instead, and since @ptr never escaped
- * from that, it proved that the inline asm wasn't touching any of
- * it. This version works well with both compilers, i.e. we're telling
- * the compiler that the inline asm absolutely may see the contents
- * of @ptr. See also: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15495
- */
-#define barrier_data(ptr) __asm__ __volatile__("": :"r"(ptr) :"memory")
-
 /*
  * This macro obfuscates arithmetic on a variable address so that gcc
  * shouldn't recognize the original var, and make assumptions about it.
diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
index 92ef163a7479..dfba70b2644f 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
@@ -80,11 +80,25 @@ void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_likely_data *f, int val,
 
 /* Optimization barrier */
 #ifndef barrier
-# define barrier() __memory_barrier()
+/* The "volatile" is due to gcc bugs */
+# define barrier() __asm__ __volatile__("": : :"memory")
 #endif
 
 #ifndef barrier_data
-# define barrier_data(ptr) barrier()
+/*
+ * This version is i.e. to prevent dead stores elimination on @ptr
+ * where gcc and llvm may behave differently when otherwise using
+ * normal barrier(): while gcc behavior gets along with a normal
+ * barrier(), llvm needs an explicit input variable to be assumed
+ * clobbered. The issue is as follows: while the inline asm might
+ * access any memory it wants, the compiler could have fit all of
+ * @ptr into memory registers instead, and since @ptr never escaped
+ * from that, it proved that the inline asm wasn't touching any of
+ * it. This version works well with both compilers, i.e. we're telling
+ * the compiler that the inline asm absolutely may see the contents
+ * of @ptr. See also: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15495
+ */
+# define barrier_data(ptr) __asm__ __volatile__("": :"r"(ptr) :"memory")
 #endif
 
 /* workaround for GCC PR82365 if needed */
-- 
2.26.2

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ