linux-kernel - Stackleak vs noinstr (Was: [GIT pull] objtool/core for v5.16-rc1)

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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YYD/bpLabfumrvL+@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Tue, 2 Nov 2021 10:05:50 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>
Subject: Stackleak vs noinstr (Was: [GIT pull] objtool/core for v5.16-rc1)

On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 09:00:36AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 01:44:39PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> >     do_machine_check()+0x27: call to stackleak_track_stack ...
> >     do_syscall_64()+0x9: call to stackleak_track_stack ...
> >     do_int80_syscall_32()+0x9: call to stackleak_track_stack ...
> >     exc_general_protection()+0x22: call to stackleak_track_stack ...
> >     fixup_bad_iret()+0x20: call to stackleak_track_stack ...
> >     .entry.text+0x10e6: call to stackleak_erase ...
> >     .entry.text+0x143: call to stackleak_erase ...
> >     .entry.text+0x17d9: call to stackleak_erase ...
> > 
> > most seem to be about the stackleak thing,
> 
> Right, I recently ran into this and hacen't yet had time to look into
> it. I suspect my normal build box doesn't have the GCC plugin crud
> enabled or somesuch.
> 
> I think the GCC stackleak plugin needs fixing, specifically it needs a
> function attribute such that it will not emit instrumentation in noinstr
> functions. I'll go chase down the developer of that thing.

Alexander, is there any way to make this plugin grow a function
attribute which we can add to noinstr ? There's a strict requirement the
compiler doesn't add extra code to noinstr functions these days.

We'll 'soon' be running noinstr C code before switching to kernel page
tables even.