linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the tip tree

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: <20220322181454.659b15269d8c2e2348f19ba1@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:14:54 +0900
From:   Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, ast@...nel.org, hjl.tools@...il.com,
        rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, rppt@...nel.org,
        linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org, Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com,
        ndesaulniers@...gle.com
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the tip tree

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 09:08:22 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:31:36PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> 
> > > Also, I think both should fix regs->ss.
> > 
> > I'm not sure this part. Since the return trampoline should run in the same
> > context of the called function, isn't ss same there too?
> 
> It creates pt_regs on the stack, so the trampolines do:
> 
> 	push $arch_rethook_trampoline
> 	push %rsp
> 	pushf
> 	sub $24, %rsp /* cs, ip, orig_ax */
> 	push %rdi
> 	...
> 	push %r15
> 
> That means that if anybody looks at regs->ss, it'll find
> $arch_rethook_trampoline, which isn't a valid segment descriptor, or am
> I just really bad at counting today?

Ah, got it. It seems that the ss was skipped from the beginning, and
no one argued that.

> I'm thinking you want a copy of __KERNEL_DS in that stack slot, not a
> function pointer.

The function pointer is for unwinding stack which involves the kretprobe.
Anyway, I can add a slot for ss if it is neeeded. But if it always be
__KERNEL_DS, is it worth to save it?

Thank you,


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>