[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+fCnZcNF5kNxNuphwj41P45tQEhQ9wX00ZA4g=KTX4sbUirQg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 17:13:33 +0100
From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>
To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>,
Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] kasan: Emit different calls for instrumentable memintrinsics
On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 12:35 AM Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 9 Feb 2023 at 23:43, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 7:42 PM Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Clang 15 will provide an option to prefix calls to memcpy/memset/memmove
> > > with __asan_ in instrumented functions: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122724
> >
> > Hi Marco,
> >
> > Does this option affect all functions or only the ones that are marked
> > with no_sanitize?
>
> Only functions that are instrumented, i.e. wherever
> fsanitize=kernel-address inserts instrumentation.
Ack.
> > Based on the LLVM patch description, should we also change the normal
> > memcpy/memset/memmove to be noninstrumented?
>
> They are no longer instrumented as of 69d4c0d32186 (for
> CONFIG_GENERIC_ENTRY arches).
Ah, sorry, overlooked that.
> > These __asan_mem* functions are not defined in the kernel AFAICS.
> > Should we add them?
>
> Peter introduced them in 69d4c0d32186, and we effectively have no
> mem*() instrumentation on x86 w/o the compiler-enablement patch here.
>
> > Or maybe we should just use "__" as the prefix, as right now __mem*
> > functions are the ones that are not instrumented?
>
> __asan_mem* is for instrumented code, just like ASan userspace does
> (actually ASan userspace has been doing it like this forever, just the
> kernel was somehow special).
>
> [...]
> > > Fixes: 69d4c0d32186 ("entry, kasan, x86: Disallow overriding mem*() functions")
> > > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > The Fixes tag is just there to show the dependency, and that people
> > > shouldn't apply this patch without 69d4c0d32186.
>
> ^^^ Depends on this commit, which is only in -tip.
Got it. Missed that patch.
> > > +ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_ENTRY
>
> It also only affects GENERIC_ENTRY arches.
>
> > > +# Instrument memcpy/memset/memmove calls by using instrumented __asan_mem*()
> > > +# instead. With compilers that don't support this option, compiler-inserted
> > > +# memintrinsics won't be checked by KASAN.
> > > +CFLAGS_KASAN += $(call cc-param,asan-kernel-mem-intrinsic-prefix)
> > > +endif
>
> Probably the same should be done for SW_TAGS, because arm64 will be
> GENERIC_ENTRY at one point or another as well.
Yes, makes sense. I'll file a bug for this once I fully understand the
consequences of these changes.
> KASAN + GCC on x86 will have no mem*() instrumentation after
> 69d4c0d32186, which is sad, so somebody ought to teach it the same
> param as above.
Hm, with that patch we would have no KASAN checking within normal mem*
functions (not the ones embedded by the compiler) on GENERIC_ENTRY
arches even with Clang, right?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists