linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 11/14] x86: add support for Dynamic Kernel Stacks

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: <87ttlbm7tj.fsf@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 14:58:00 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  linux-mm@...ck.org,
  akpm@...ux-foundation.org,  x86@...nel.org,  bp@...en8.de,
  brauner@...nel.org,  bristot@...hat.com,  bsegall@...gle.com,
  dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,  dianders@...omium.org,
  dietmar.eggemann@....com,  eric.devolder@...cle.com,  hca@...ux.ibm.com,
  hch@...radead.org,  hpa@...or.com,  jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com,
  jgg@...pe.ca,  jpoimboe@...nel.org,  jroedel@...e.de,
  juri.lelli@...hat.com,  kent.overstreet@...ux.dev,  kinseyho@...gle.com,
  kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,  lstoakes@...il.com,  luto@...nel.org,
  mgorman@...e.de,  mic@...ikod.net,  michael.christie@...cle.com,
  mingo@...hat.com,  mjguzik@...il.com,  mst@...hat.com,
  npiggin@...il.com,  peterz@...radead.org,  pmladek@...e.com,
  rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com,  rostedt@...dmis.org,  surenb@...gle.com,
  tglx@...utronix.de,  urezki@...il.com,  vincent.guittot@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 11/14] x86: add support for Dynamic Kernel Stacks

Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com> writes:

> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> index d6375b3c633b..651c558b10eb 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
> @@ -1198,6 +1198,9 @@ do_kern_addr_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long hw_error_code,
>  	if (is_f00f_bug(regs, hw_error_code, address))
>  		return;
>  
> +	if (dynamic_stack_fault(current, address))
> +		return;

Probably I'm missing something here, but since you are on the same stack as
you are trying to fix up, how can this possibly work?

Fault on missing stack
#PF
<will push more stuff onto the missing stack causing a double fault>

You would need a separate stack just to handle this. But the normal
page fault handler couldn't use it because it needs to be able to block.

Ah I get it -- you handle it in the double fault handler?  So every
stack grow will be a #DF too? That's scary. 


-Andi