linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3 18/39] x86/ibt,ftrace: Make function-graph play nice

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Fri, 4 Mar 2022 23:08:23 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Peter Zijlstra' <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
CC:     "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "joao@...rdrivepizza.com" <joao@...rdrivepizza.com>,
        "hjl.tools@...il.com" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
        "andrew.cooper3@...rix.com" <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ndesaulniers@...gle.com" <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "samitolvanen@...gle.com" <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
        "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "alyssa.milburn@...el.com" <alyssa.milburn@...el.com>,
        "mbenes@...e.cz" <mbenes@...e.cz>,
        "rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "mhiramat@...nel.org" <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        "alexei.starovoitov@...il.com" <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 18/39] x86/ibt,ftrace: Make function-graph play nice

From: Peter Zijlstra
> Sent: 04 March 2022 19:49
> 
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 09:51:54AM -0800, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 12:23:39PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > +
> > > +	addq $16, %rsp
> > > +	ANNOTATE_INTRA_FUNCTION_CALL
> > > +	call .Ldo_rop
> > > +	int3
> > > +.Ldo_rop:
> > > +	mov %rdi, (%rsp)
> > > +	UNWIND_HINT_FUNC
> > > +	RET
> >
> > Why the int3?
> 
> Speculation trap :-) Either I'm too paranoid or not paranoid enough; but
> without it it's just too close to a retpoline and it doesn't feel right.

Isn't 'jmps .' good enough for a speculation trap?
I'm sure there is a potential issue using 'int 3' because
it is a slow instruction and might take some time to abort.

I actually remember something from a very old Intel doc that
told you not to mix code and data because you didn't want to
'accidentally' execute something like 'atan'.
I can't remember the full context - but it may have been
speculatively executing code after unconditional jumps!
There were certainly bigger problems because the cpu at that
time wouldn't abort the atan - so you had to wait for it to
finish.

I suspect you do need something between the call and label.
The sequence:
	call 1f
1:	pop %rax
is used to get the %pc (especially on 32bit) and is detected
so that it doesn't mess up the return stack.
So you probably want to avoid a call to the next instruction.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)