Message-ID: <ae5fea4b-8c33-c523-9d6d-3f27a9ae03d0@amd.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Oct 2022 14:43:19 -0500
From:   John Allen <john.allen@....com>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, 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>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        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>,
        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>,
        Weijiang Yang <weijiang.yang@...el.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        joao.moreira@...el.com, kcc@...gle.com, eranian@...gle.com,
        rppt@...nel.org, jamorris@...ux.microsoft.com,
        dethoma@...rosoft.com, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        "Moger, Babu" <babu.moger@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 33/39] x86/cpufeatures: Limit shadow stack to Intel
 CPUs

On 10/4/22 10:47 AM, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Hi Kees,
> 
> On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 09:54:26PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 05:09:04PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> On 10/3/22 16:57, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 03:29:30PM -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
>>>>> Shadow stack is supported on newer AMD processors, but the kernel
>>>>> implementation has not been tested on them. Prevent basic issues from
>>>>> showing up for normal users by disabling shadow stack on all CPUs except
>>>>> Intel until it has been tested. At which point the limitation should be
>>>>> removed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
>>>> So running the selftests on an AMD system is sufficient to drop this
>>>> patch?
>>>
>>> Yes, that's enough.
>>>
>>> I _thought_ the AMD folks provided some tested-by's at some point in the
>>> past.  But, maybe I'm confusing this for one of the other shared
>>> features.  Either way, I'm sure no tested-by's were dropped on purpose.
>>>
>>> I'm sure Rick is eager to trim down his series and this would be a great
>>> patch to drop.  Does anyone want to make that easy for Rick?
>>>
>>> <hint> <hint>
>>
>> Hey Gustavo, Nathan, or Nick! I know y'all have some fancy AMD testing
>> rigs. Got a moment to spin up this series and run the selftests? :)
> 
> I do have access to a system with an EPYC 7513, which does have Shadow
> Stack support (I can see 'shstk' in the "Flags" section of lscpu with
> this series). As far as I understand it, AMD only added Shadow Stack
> with Zen 3; my regular AMD test system is Zen 2 (probably should look at
> procurring a Zen 3 or Zen 4 one at some point).
> 
> I applied this series on top of 6.0 and reverted this change then booted
> it on that system. After building the selftest (which did require
> 'make headers_install' and a small addition to make it build beyond
> that, see below), I ran it and this was the result. I am not sure if
> that is expected or not but the other results seem promising for
> dropping this patch.
> 
>   $ ./test_shadow_stack_64
>   [INFO]  new_ssp = 7f8a36c9fff8, *new_ssp = 7f8a36ca0001
>   [INFO]  changing ssp from 7f8a374a0ff0 to 7f8a36c9fff8
>   [INFO]  ssp is now 7f8a36ca0000
>   [OK]    Shadow stack pivot
>   [OK]    Shadow stack faults
>   [INFO]  Corrupting shadow stack
>   [INFO]  Generated shadow stack violation successfully
>   [OK]    Shadow stack violation test
>   [INFO]  Gup read -> shstk access success
>   [INFO]  Gup write -> shstk access success
>   [INFO]  Violation from normal write
>   [INFO]  Gup read -> write access success
>   [INFO]  Violation from normal write
>   [INFO]  Gup write -> write access success
>   [INFO]  Cow gup write -> write access success
>   [OK]    Shadow gup test
>   [INFO]  Violation from shstk access
>   [OK]    mprotect() test
>   [OK]    Userfaultfd test
>   [FAIL]  Alt shadow stack test

The selftest is looking OK on my system (Dell PowerEdge R6515 w/ EPYC
7713). I also just pulled a fresh 6.0 kernel and applied the series
including the fix Nathan mentions below.

$ tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_shadow_stack_64
[INFO]  new_ssp = 7f30cccc5ff8, *new_ssp = 7f30cccc6001
[INFO]  changing ssp from 7f30cd4c6ff0 to 7f30cccc5ff8
[INFO]  ssp is now 7f30cccc6000
[OK]    Shadow stack pivot
[OK]    Shadow stack faults
[INFO]  Corrupting shadow stack
[INFO]  Generated shadow stack violation successfully
[OK]    Shadow stack violation test
[INFO]  Gup read -> shstk access success
[INFO]  Gup write -> shstk access success
[INFO]  Violation from normal write
[INFO]  Gup read -> write access success
[INFO]  Violation from normal write
[INFO]  Gup write -> write access success
[INFO]  Cow gup write -> write access success
[OK]    Shadow gup test
[INFO]  Violation from shstk access
[OK]    mprotect() test
[OK]    Userfaultfd test
[OK]    Alt shadow stack test.

> 
>   $ echo $?
>   1
> 
> I am happy to provide any information that would be useful for exploring
> this failure and test further iterations of this series as necessary.
> 
> Cheers,
> Nathan
> 
> test_shadow_stack.c: In function ‘create_shstk’:
> test_shadow_stack.c:86:70: error: ‘SHADOW_STACK_SET_TOKEN’ undeclared (first use in this function)
>    86 |         return (void *)syscall(__NR_map_shadow_stack, addr, SS_SIZE, SHADOW_STACK_SET_TOKEN);
>       |                                                                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> test_shadow_stack.c:86:70: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> test_shadow_stack.c:87:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
>    87 | }
>       | ^
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_shadow_stack.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_shadow_stack.c
> index 22b856de5cdd..958dbb248518 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_shadow_stack.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_shadow_stack.c
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
>  #define _GNU_SOURCE
>  
>  #include <sys/syscall.h>
> +#include <asm/mman.h>
>  #include <sys/mman.h>
>  #include <sys/stat.h>
>  #include <sys/wait.h>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists