linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 05/28] x86: Define the stack protector guard symbol explicitly

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMzpN2jWRV8-JzM2FjSvSz+VoDrNVeEJPgF7N5ksLaADHpnHsA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 10:36:03 -0400
From: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+git@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, 
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, 
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, 
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, 
	Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>, 
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, 
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, 
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>, 
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, 
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, 
	Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, 
	Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, 
	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/28] x86: Define the stack protector guard symbol explicitly

On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 9:15 AM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 28 Sept 2024 at 15:41, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 2:33 PM Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 5:02 PM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+git@...gle.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
> > > >
> > > > Specify the guard symbol for the stack cookie explicitly, rather than
> > > > positioning it exactly 40 bytes into the per-CPU area. Doing so removes
> > > > the need for the per-CPU region to be absolute rather than relative to
> > > > the placement of the per-CPU template region in the kernel image, and
> > > > this allows the special handling for absolute per-CPU symbols to be
> > > > removed entirely.
> > > >
> > > > This is a worthwhile cleanup in itself, but it is also a prerequisite
> > > > for PIE codegen and PIE linking, which can replace our bespoke and
> > > > rather clunky runtime relocation handling.
> > >
> > > I would like to point out a series that converted the stack protector
> > > guard symbol to a normal percpu variable [1], so there was no need to
> > > assume anything about the location of the guard symbol.
> > >
> > > [1] "[PATCH v4 00/16] x86-64: Stack protector and percpu improvements"
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240322165233.71698-1-brgerst@gmail.com/
> > >
> > > Uros.
> >
> > I plan on resubmitting that series sometime after the 6.12 merge
> > window closes.  As I recall from the last version, it was decided to
> > wait until after the next LTS release to raise the minimum GCC version
> > to 8.1 and avoid the need to be compatible with the old stack
> > protector layout.
> >
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> I'd be more than happy to compare notes on that - I wasn't aware of
> your intentions here, or I would have reached out before sending this
> RFC.
>
> There are two things that you would need to address for Clang support
> to work correctly:
> - the workaround I cc'ed you on the other day [0],
> - a workaround for the module loader so it tolerates the GOTPCRELX
> relocations that Clang emits [1]
>
>
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241002092534.3163838-2-ardb+git@google.com/
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ardb/linux.git/commit/?id=a18121aabbdd

The first patch should be applied independently as a bug fix, since it
already affects the 32-bit build with clang.

I don't have an environment with an older clang compiler to test the
second patch, but I'll assume it will be necessary.  I did run into an
issue with the GOTPCRELX relocations before [1], but I thought it was
just an objtool issue and didn't do more testing to know if modules
were broken or not.

Brian Gerst

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231026160100.195099-6-brgerst@gmail.com/