| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 17:36:32 +0800
From: Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
To: Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com>
Cc: palmer@...belt.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: VMAP_STACK overflow detection thread-safe
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 3:10 PM Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 02:31:25PM +0800, Guo Ren wrote:
> >On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 1:57 PM Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Inline.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 5:28 PM Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 8:50 AM Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> commit 31da94c25aea835ceac00575a9fd206c5a833fed added support for
> >> >> CONFIG_VMAP_STACK. If overflow is detected, CPU switches to `shadow_stack`
> >> >> temporarily before switching finally to per-cpu `overflow_stack`.
> >> >>
> >> >> If two CPUs/harts are racing and end up in over flowing kernel stack, one
> >> >> or both will end up corrupting each other state because `shadow_stack` is
> >> >> not per-cpu.
> >> >>
> >> >> Following are the changes in this patch
> >> >>
> >> >> - Defines an asm macro to obtain per-cpu symbols in destination
> >> >> register.
> >> >> - Computing per-cpu symbol requires a temporary register. When stack is
> >> >> out of question, a place is needed to spill a register. `thread_info`
> >> >> is good location to have spill register.
> >> >> - In entry.S when overflow is detected x31 is spilled into thread_info.
> >> >> x31 is used as temp reg for asm macro to locate per-cpu overflow stack
> >> >>
> >> >> Other relevant disccussion on this
> >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/Y347B0x4VUNOd6V7@xhacker/T/#t
> >> >>
> >> >> Tested by `echo EXHAUST_STACK > /sys/kernel/debug/provoke-crash/DIRECT`
> >> >>
> >> >> [ 286.223273] Insufficient stack space to handle exception!/debug/provoke-crash/DIRECT
> >> >> [ 286.223878] Task stack: [0xff20000010a98000..0xff20000010a9c000]
> >> >> [ 286.224411] Overflow stack: [0xff600001f7d98370..0xff600001f7d99370]
> >> >> [ 286.226057] CPU: 1 PID: 205 Comm: bash Not tainted 6.1.0-rc2-00001-g328a1f96f7b9 #34
> >> >> [ 286.227139] Hardware name: riscv-virtio,qemu (DT)
> >> >> [ 286.228000] epc : __memset+0x60/0xfc
> >> >> [ 286.229299] ra : recursive_loop+0x48/0xc6 [lkdtm]
> >> >> [ 286.231457] epc : ffffffff808de0e4 ra : ffffffff0163a752 sp : ff20000010a97e80
> >> >> [ 286.232207] gp : ffffffff815c0330 tp : ff600000820ea280 t0 : ff20000010a97e88
> >> >> [ 286.233584] t1 : 000000000000002e t2 : 3233206874706564 s0 : ff20000010a982b0
> >> >> [ 286.234293] s1 : 0000000000000012 a0 : ff20000010a97e88 a1 : 0000000000000000
> >> >> [ 286.234998] a2 : 0000000000000400 a3 : ff20000010a98288 a4 : 0000000000000000
> >> >> [ 286.235697] a5 : 0000000000000000 a6 : fffffffffffe43f0 a7 : 00007fffffffffff
> >> >> [ 286.236384] s2 : ff20000010a97e88 s3 : ffffffff01644680 s4 : ff20000010a9be90
> >> >> [ 286.237743] s5 : ff600000842ba6c0 s6 : 00aaaaaac29e42b0 s7 : 00fffffff0aa3684
> >> >> [ 286.238691] s8 : 00aaaaaac2978040 s9 : 0000000000000065 s10: 00ffffff8a7cad10
> >> >> [ 286.239591] s11: 00ffffff8a76a4e0 t3 : ffffffff815dbaf4 t4 : ffffffff815dbaf4
> >> >> [ 286.240537] t5 : ffffffff815dbab8 t6 : ff20000010a9bb48
> >> >> [ 286.241540] status: 0000000200000120 badaddr: ff20000010a97e88 cause: 000000000000000f
> >> >> [ 286.242979] Kernel panic - not syncing: Kernel stack overflow
> >> >> [ 286.244106] CPU: 1 PID: 205 Comm: bash Not tainted 6.1.0-rc2-00001-g328a1f96f7b9 #34
> >> >> [ 286.245276] Hardware name: riscv-virtio,qemu (DT)
> >> >> [ 286.245929] Call Trace:
> >> >> [ 286.246954] [<ffffffff80006754>] dump_backtrace+0x30/0x38
> >> >> [ 286.247813] [<ffffffff808de798>] show_stack+0x40/0x4c
> >> >> [ 286.248429] [<ffffffff808ea2a8>] dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x5c
> >> >> [ 286.249439] [<ffffffff808ea2d8>] dump_stack+0x18/0x20
> >> >> [ 286.250056] [<ffffffff808dec06>] panic+0x126/0x2fe
> >> >> [ 286.250642] [<ffffffff800065ea>] walk_stackframe+0x0/0xf0
> >> >> [ 286.251357] [<ffffffff0163a752>] recursive_loop+0x48/0xc6 [lkdtm]
> >> >> [ 286.253321] SMP: stopping secondary CPUs
> >> >> [ 286.256724] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Kernel stack overflow ]---
> >> >>
> >> >> Fixes: 31da94c25aea835ceac00575a9fd206c5a833fed
> >> >
> >> > The patch gives more significant change than the Fixes, and Fixes would expand to the previous stable versions. Please don't set it as a Fixes, but an improved OVERSTACK dead path performance feature.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Not a performance feature but more like correctness.
> >> If kernel died and two CPUs raced to kernel stack overflow,
> >> death post-mortem should be straightforward.
> >We already have had a fixup, and your patch likes a feature with a
> >significant change.
> >https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20221030124517.2370-1-jszhang@kernel.org/
> >If it is for correctness, the simple lock is enough.
>
> Sure lock is enough.
> It's different way to solve the problem.
> But I don't think it qualifies as significant change.
>
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Cc: Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
> >> >> Cc: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com>
> >> >> ---
> >> >> arch/riscv/include/asm/asm.h | 11 ++++++
> >> >> arch/riscv/include/asm/thread_info.h | 3 ++
> >> >> arch/riscv/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 4 +++
> >> >> arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S | 54 ++++------------------------
> >> >> arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c | 12 +------
> >> >> 5 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/asm.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/asm.h
> >> >> index 1b471ff73178..373eba843331 100644
> >> >> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/asm.h
> >> >> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/asm.h
> >> >> @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@
> >> >>
> >> >> #ifdef __ASSEMBLY__
> >> >>
> >> >> +#include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
> >> >> /* Common assembly source macros */
> >> >>
> >> >> /*
> >> >> @@ -80,6 +81,16 @@
> >> >> .endr
> >> >> .endm
> >> >>
> >> >> +.macro asm_per_cpu dst sym tmp
> >> >> + REG_L \tmp, TASK_TI_CPU_NUM(tp)
> >> >> + slli \tmp, \tmp, 0x3
> >> >> + la \dst, __per_cpu_offset
> >> >> + add \dst, \dst, \tmp
> >> >> + REG_L \tmp, 0(\dst)
> >> >> + la \dst, \sym
> >> >> + add \dst, \dst, \tmp
> >> >
> >> > Another tricky asm code of using percpu, I don't know how the percpu maintenance guy thinks.
> >>
> >> Pretty much the same exists for arm64 as well.
> >That's not the reason.
> >
> >> I don't see anything tricky here.
> >I prefer using standard percpu API, not hacking one.
>
> `this_cpu_ptr` is not an API. It's also a C macro which expands similar
> as above written asm macro. First time that macro was written,
> it was a hack and now it's an API.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Percpu is really complex to be used here. That's why I don't like Jisheng's previous idea, although I haven't given an explicitly opposed comment.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Why is per-cpu really complex here?
> >> That's why per-cpu exists, right?
> >> Compiler generates pretty much same code everywhere for C.
> >>
> >> > Keep simple and direct.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> +.endm
> >> >> +
> >> >> #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
> >> >>
> >> >> #endif /* _ASM_RISCV_ASM_H */
> >> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/thread_info.h
> >> >> index 67322f878e0d..7e17dc07cf11 100644
> >> >> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/thread_info.h
> >> >> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/thread_info.h
> >> >> @@ -65,6 +65,9 @@ struct thread_info {
> >> >> */
> >> >> long kernel_sp; /* Kernel stack pointer */
> >> >> long user_sp; /* User stack pointer */
> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_VMAP_STACK
> >> >> + long spill_reg; /* per cpu scratch space to spill a single register */
> >> >> +#endif
> >> >
> >> > Is it worth expanding "struct thread_info" with another reg size? A dead path performance issue affects living cost. May we give a cheap funeral for the OVERFLOW_STACK death?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yes I had been thinking over it and your point is quite valid.
> >> There is a death's charge (in a corner case) to living structures
> >> (particularly to all threads)
> >> Andrew Bresticker (abrestic@...osinc.com) suggested using `sscratch`
> >> to spill into.
> >> I think that makes sense.
> >>
> >> I'll send a revised patch.
> >I think that's not a fix because your patch broke the previous author's design.
> >
>
> If that's the concern, I can send it out as "not a fix" but "alternative solution".
Thx.
>
> >Below is the fixup style:
> >https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20221030124517.2370-1-jszhang@kernel.org/
> >Just fix the previous author's design with a simple spinlock?
> >
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> int cpu;
> >> >> };
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/asm-offsets.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/asm-offsets.c
> >> >> index df9444397908..bed3c83bfb8f 100644
> >> >> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/asm-offsets.c
> >> >> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/asm-offsets.c
> >> >> @@ -38,6 +38,10 @@ void asm_offsets(void)
> >> >> OFFSET(TASK_TI_KERNEL_SP, task_struct, thread_info.kernel_sp);
> >> >> OFFSET(TASK_TI_USER_SP, task_struct, thread_info.user_sp);
> >> >>
> >> >> + OFFSET(TASK_TI_CPU_NUM, task_struct, thread_info.cpu);
> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_VMAP_STACK
> >> >> + OFFSET(TASK_TI_SPILL_REG, task_struct, thread_info.spill_reg);
> >> >> +#endif
> >> >> OFFSET(TASK_THREAD_F0, task_struct, thread.fstate.f[0]);
> >> >> OFFSET(TASK_THREAD_F1, task_struct, thread.fstate.f[1]);
> >> >> OFFSET(TASK_THREAD_F2, task_struct, thread.fstate.f[2]);
> >> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S b/arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S
> >> >> index b9eda3fcbd6d..12f285cec136 100644
> >> >> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S
> >> >> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S
> >> >> @@ -10,9 +10,11 @@
> >> >> #include <asm/asm.h>
> >> >> #include <asm/csr.h>
> >> >> #include <asm/unistd.h>
> >> >> +#include <asm/page.h>
> >> >> #include <asm/thread_info.h>
> >> >> #include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
> >> >> #include <asm/errata_list.h>
> >> >> +#include <linux/sizes.h>
> >> >>
> >> >> #if !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPTION)
> >> >> .set resume_kernel, restore_all
> >> >> @@ -404,54 +406,12 @@ handle_syscall_trace_exit:
> >> >>
> >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_VMAP_STACK
> >> >> handle_kernel_stack_overflow:
> >> >> - la sp, shadow_stack
> >> >> - addi sp, sp, SHADOW_OVERFLOW_STACK_SIZE
> >> >> + REG_S x31, TASK_TI_SPILL_REG(tp)
> >> >> + asm_per_cpu sp, overflow_stack, x31
> >> >> + li x31, OVERFLOW_STACK_SIZE
> >> >> + add sp, sp, x31
> >> >> + REG_L x31, TASK_TI_SPILL_REG(tp)
> >> >>
> >> >> - //save caller register to shadow stack
> >> >> - addi sp, sp, -(PT_SIZE_ON_STACK)
> >> >> - REG_S x1, PT_RA(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x5, PT_T0(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x6, PT_T1(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x7, PT_T2(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x10, PT_A0(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x11, PT_A1(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x12, PT_A2(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x13, PT_A3(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x14, PT_A4(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x15, PT_A5(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x16, PT_A6(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x17, PT_A7(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x28, PT_T3(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x29, PT_T4(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x30, PT_T5(sp)
> >> >> - REG_S x31, PT_T6(sp)
> >> >> -
> >> >> - la ra, restore_caller_reg
> >> >> - tail get_overflow_stack
> >> >> -
> >> >> -restore_caller_reg:
> >> >> - //save per-cpu overflow stack
> >> >> - REG_S a0, -8(sp)
> >> >> - //restore caller register from shadow_stack
> >> >> - REG_L x1, PT_RA(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x5, PT_T0(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x6, PT_T1(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x7, PT_T2(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x10, PT_A0(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x11, PT_A1(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x12, PT_A2(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x13, PT_A3(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x14, PT_A4(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x15, PT_A5(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x16, PT_A6(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x17, PT_A7(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x28, PT_T3(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x29, PT_T4(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x30, PT_T5(sp)
> >> >> - REG_L x31, PT_T6(sp)
> >> >> -
> >> >> - //load per-cpu overflow stack
> >> >> - REG_L sp, -8(sp)
> >> >
> >> > Yes, your patch gives a good performance here. But what do we gain?
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> addi sp, sp, -(PT_SIZE_ON_STACK)
> >> >>
> >> >> //save context to overflow stack
> >> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c
> >> >> index f3e96d60a2ff..eef3a87514c7 100644
> >> >> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c
> >> >> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c
> >> >> @@ -208,18 +208,8 @@ int is_valid_bugaddr(unsigned long pc)
> >> >> #endif /* CONFIG_GENERIC_BUG */
> >> >>
> >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_VMAP_STACK
> >> >> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long [OVERFLOW_STACK_SIZE/sizeof(long)],
> >> >> +DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long [OVERFLOW_STACK_SIZE/sizeof(long)],
> >> >> overflow_stack)__aligned(16);
> >> >> -/*
> >> >> - * shadow stack, handled_ kernel_ stack_ overflow(in kernel/entry.S) is used
> >> >> - * to get per-cpu overflow stack(get_overflow_stack).
> >> >> - */
> >> >> -long shadow_stack[SHADOW_OVERFLOW_STACK_SIZE/sizeof(long)];
> >> >> -asmlinkage unsigned long get_overflow_stack(void)
> >> >> -{
> >> >> - return (unsigned long)this_cpu_ptr(overflow_stack) +
> >> >> - OVERFLOW_STACK_SIZE;
> >> >> -}
> >> >>
> >> >> asmlinkage void handle_bad_stack(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >> >> {
> >> >> --
> >> >> 2.25.1
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best Regards
> >> > Guo Ren
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Best Regards
> > Guo Ren
--
Best Regards
Guo Ren
Powered by blists - more mailing lists