linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 08/31] KVM: selftests: Require GCC to realign stacks on function entry

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: <Y+1bom6CMFeNGWmm@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Feb 2023 14:24:34 -0800
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@...gle.com>
Cc:     erdemaktas@...gle.com, mail@...iej.szmigiero.name,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        isaku.yamahata@...el.com, sagis@...gle.com, afranji@...gle.com,
        runanwang@...gle.com, shuah@...nel.org, drjones@...hat.com,
        maz@...nel.org, bgardon@...gle.com, jmattson@...gle.com,
        dmatlack@...gle.com, peterx@...hat.com, oupton@...gle.com,
        ricarkol@...gle.com, yang.zhong@...el.com, wei.w.wang@...el.com,
        xiaoyao.li@...el.com, pgonda@...gle.com, marcorr@...gle.com,
        eesposit@...hat.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com, eric.auger@...hat.com,
        wangyanan55@...wei.com, aaronlewis@...gle.com, vkuznets@...hat.com,
        pshier@...gle.com, axelrasmussen@...gle.com,
        zhenzhong.duan@...el.com, like.xu@...ux.intel.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 08/31] KVM: selftests: Require GCC to realign
 stacks on function entry

On Wed, Feb 15, 2023, Ackerley Tng wrote:
> I figured it out!
> 
> GCC assumes that the stack is 16-byte aligned **before** the call
> instruction. Since call pushes rip to the stack, GCC will compile code
> assuming that on entrance to the function, the stack is -8 from a
> 16-byte aligned address.
> 
> Since for TDs we do a ljmp to guest code, providing a function's
> address, the stack was not modified by a call instruction pushing rip to
> the stack, so the stack is 16-byte aligned when the guest code starts
> running, instead of 16-byte aligned -8 that GCC expects.
> 
> For VMs, we set rip to a function pointer, and the VM starts running
> with a 16-byte algined stack too.
> 
> To fix this, I propose that in vm_arch_vcpu_add(), we align the
> allocated stack address and then subtract 8 from that:
> 
> @@ -573,10 +573,13 @@ struct kvm_vcpu *vm_arch_vcpu_add(struct kvm_vm *vm,
> uint32_t vcpu_id,
>         vcpu_init_cpuid(vcpu, kvm_get_supported_cpuid());
>         vcpu_setup(vm, vcpu);
> 
> +       stack_vaddr += (DEFAULT_STACK_PGS * getpagesize());
> +       stack_vaddr = ALIGN_DOWN(stack_vaddr, 16) - 8;

The ALIGN_DOWN should be unnecessary, we've got larger issues if getpagesize() isn't
16-byte aligned and/or if __vm_vaddr_alloc() returns anything but a page-aligned
address.  Maybe add a TEST_ASSERT() sanity check that stack_vaddr is page-aligned
at this point?

And in addition to the comment suggested by Maciej, can you also add a comment
explaining the -8 adjust?  Yeah, someone can go read the changelog, but I think
this is worth explicitly documenting in code.

Lastly, can you post it as a standalone patch?

Many thanks!