[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2d829cba-784e-635a-e0c5-a7b334fa9b40@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 10:00:21 -0800
From: "Yu, Yu-cheng" <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
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>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 06/25] x86/cet: Add control-protection fault handler
On 2/5/2021 5:59 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 02:55:28PM -0800, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
>> +DEFINE_IDTENTRY_ERRORCODE(exc_control_protection)
>> +{
>> + static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(rs, DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_INTERVAL,
>> + DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_BURST);
>> + struct task_struct *tsk;
>> +
>> + if (!user_mode(regs)) {
>> + pr_emerg("PANIC: unexpected kernel control protection fault\n");
>> + die("kernel control protection fault", regs, error_code);
>> + panic("Machine halted.");
>> + }
>> +
>> + cond_local_irq_enable(regs);
>> +
>> + if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CET))
>> + WARN_ONCE(1, "Control protection fault with CET support disabled\n");
>> +
>> + tsk = current;
>> + tsk->thread.error_code = error_code;
>> + tsk->thread.trap_nr = X86_TRAP_CP;
>> +
>> + if (show_unhandled_signals && unhandled_signal(tsk, SIGSEGV) &&
>> + __ratelimit(&rs)) {
>
> I can't find it written down anywhere why the ratelimiting is needed at
> all?
>
The ratelimit here is only for #CP, and its rate is not counted together
with other types of faults. If a task gets here, it will exit. The
only condition the ratelimit will trigger is when multiple tasks hit #CP
at once, which is unlikely. Are you suggesting that we do not need the
ratelimit here?
Thanks!
--
Yu-cheng
Powered by blists - more mailing lists