[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y9jh5Gi/dH09ajQD@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 10:39:48 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/tdx: Do not corrupt frame-pointer in
__tdx_hypercall()
On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 11:39:01AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 09:34:12AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 04:53:54PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > If compiled with CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER=y, objtool in not happy that
> > > __tdx_hypercall() messes up RBP.
> > >
> > > objtool: __tdx_hypercall+0x7f: return with modified stack frame
> > >
> > > Rework the function to store TDX_HCALL_ flags on stack instead of RBP.
> >
> > Also, on IRC you mentioned that per TDX spec, BP is a valid argument
> > register too and you were going to raise this and get it fixed, TDX
> > hypercalls must not use BP to pass data.
>
> I've raised the question yesterday. No progress so far. It will take time
> to get it into the public spec.
Sure, just making sure it's not forgotten about. Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists