linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] objtool: Detect and warn about indirect calls in _

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: <EB1786D7-C7FE-4517-A207-C5F63AC0F911@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2025 11:42:05 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: x86@...nel.org, kys@...rosoft.com, haiyangz@...rosoft.com,
        wei.liu@...nel.org, decui@...rosoft.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, ardb@...nel.org, kees@...nel.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        jpoimboe@...nel.org, linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, samitolvanen@...gle.com, ojeda@...nel.org,
        xin@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] objtool: Detect and warn about indirect calls in __nocfi functions

On May 1, 2025 11:30:18 AM PDT, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
>On Thu, May 01, 2025, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 12:30:38PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 09:06:00PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 07:24:15AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > > >KVM has another; the VMX interrupt injection stuff calls the IDT handler
>> > > > >directly.  Is there an alternative? Can we keep a table of Linux functions
>> > > > >slighly higher up the call stack (asm_\cfunc ?) and add CFI to those?
>> > > 
>> > > > We do have a table of handlers higher up in the stack in the form of
>> > > > the dispatch tables for FRED. They don't in general even need the
>> > > > assembly entry stubs, either.
>> > > 
>> > > Oh, right. I'll go have a look at those.
>> > 
>> > Right, so perhaps the easiest way around this is to setup the FRED entry
>> > tables unconditionally, have VMX mandate CONFIG_FRED and then have it
>> > always use the FRED entry points.
>> > 
>> > Let me see how ugly that gets.
>> 
>> Something like so... except this is broken. Its reporting spurious
>> interrupts on vector 0x00, so something is buggered passing that vector
>> along.
>
>Uh, aren't you making this way more complex than it needs to be?  IIUC, KVM never
>uses the FRED hardware entry points, i.e. the FRED entry tables don't need to be
>in place because they'll never be used.  The only bits of code KVM needs is the
>__fred_entry_from_kvm() glue.
>
>Lightly tested, but this combo works for IRQs and NMIs on non-FRED hardware.
>
>--
>>From 664468143109ab7c525c0babeba62195fa4c657e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
>Date: Thu, 1 May 2025 11:20:29 -0700
>Subject: [PATCH 1/2] x86/fred: Play nice with invoking
> asm_fred_entry_from_kvm() on non-FRED hardware
>
>Modify asm_fred_entry_from_kvm() to allow it to be invoked by KVM even
>when FRED isn't fully enabled, e.g. when running with CONFIG_X86_FRED=y
>on non-FRED hardware.  This will allow forcing KVM to always use the FRED
>entry points for 64-bit kernels, which in turn will eliminate a rather
>gross non-CFI indirect call that KVM uses to trampoline IRQs by doing IDT
>lookups.
>
>When FRED isn't enabled, simply skip ERETS and restore RBP and RSP from
>the stack frame prior to doing a "regular" RET back to KVM (in quotes
>because of all the RET mitigation horrors).
>
>Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
>---
> arch/x86/entry/entry_64_fred.S | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64_fred.S b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64_fred.S
>index 29c5c32c16c3..7aff2f0a285f 100644
>--- a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64_fred.S
>+++ b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64_fred.S
>@@ -116,7 +116,8 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(asm_fred_entry_from_kvm)
> 	movq %rsp, %rdi				/* %rdi -> pt_regs */
> 	call __fred_entry_from_kvm		/* Call the C entry point */
> 	POP_REGS
>-	ERETS
>+
>+	ALTERNATIVE "", __stringify(ERETS), X86_FEATURE_FRED
> 1:
> 	/*
> 	 * Objtool doesn't understand what ERETS does, this hint tells it that
>@@ -124,7 +125,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(asm_fred_entry_from_kvm)
> 	 * isn't strictly needed, but it's the simplest form.
> 	 */
> 	UNWIND_HINT_RESTORE
>-	pop %rbp
>+	leave
> 	RET
> 
> SYM_FUNC_END(asm_fred_entry_from_kvm)
>
>base-commit: 45eb29140e68ffe8e93a5471006858a018480a45

Ok maybe I'm being dense, but what is left other than simply calling __fred_entry_from_kvm() as a normal C function? 

I'm on the go so there might be something in the code I'm missing, but on the surface...?