[PATCH 2/2] arm64: Clear the stack
From: Laura Abbott <hidden>
Date: 2018-02-21 23:53:35
Also in:
lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2018-07-19 · Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: Clear the stack · Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
- 2018-07-19 · Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: Clear the stack · Alexander Popov <hidden>
- 2018-07-19 · Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: Clear the stack · Kees Cook <hidden>
- 2018-07-18 · [PATCH 2/2] arm64: Clear the stack · Laura Abbott <hidden>
- 2018-05-14 · Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: Clear the stack · Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
On 02/21/2018 07:38 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
Hi Laura, On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 05:13:03PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:quoted
Implementation of stackleak based heavily on the x86 versionNeat!quoted
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S index ec2ee720e33e..b909b436293a 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S@@ -401,6 +401,11 @@ tsk .req x28 // current thread_info .text + .macro erase_kstack +#ifdef CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STACKLEAK + bl __erase_kstack +#endif + .endm /* * Exception vectors. */@@ -901,6 +906,7 @@ work_pending: */ ret_to_user: disable_daif + erase_kstackI *think* this should happen in finish_ret_to_user a few lines down, since we can call C code if we branch to work_pending, dirtying the stack.
I think you're right but this didn't immediately work when I tried it. I'll have to dig into this some more.
quoted
ldr x1, [tsk, #TSK_TI_FLAGS] and x2, x1, #_TIF_WORK_MASK cbnz x2, work_pending@@ -1337,3 +1343,105 @@ alternative_else_nop_endif ENDPROC(__sdei_asm_handler) NOKPROBE(__sdei_asm_handler) #endif /* CONFIG_ARM_SDE_INTERFACE */ + +/* + * This is what the stack looks like + * + * +---+ <- task_stack_page(p) + THREAD_SIZE + * | | + * +---+ <- task_stack_page(p) + THREAD_START_SP + * | | + * | | + * +---+ <- task_pt_regs(p)THREAD_START_SP got killed off in commit 34be98f4944f9907 as part of the VMAP_STACK rework, so this can be: +---+ <- task_stack_page(p) + THREAD_SIZE | | | | +---+ <- task_pt_regs(p) ...
Good point.
quoted
+ * | | + * | | + * | | <- current_sp + * ~~~~~ + * + * ~~~~~ + * | | <- lowest_stack + * | | + * | | + * +---+ <- task_stack_page(p) + * + * This function is desgned to poison the memory between the lowest_stack + * and the current stack pointer. After clearing the stack, the lowest + * stack is reset. + */ + +#ifdef CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STACKLEAK +ENTRY(__erase_kstack) + mov x10, x0 // save x0 for the fast pathAFAICT, we only call this from ret_to_user, where x0 doesn't need to be preserved. Is that for ret_fast_syscall? In some cases, ret_fast_syscall can bypass ret_to_user and calls kernel_exit directly, so we might need a call there.
This was a hold over when I was experimenting with calling erase_kstack more places, one of which came through ret_fast_syscall. I realized later that the erase was unnecessary but accidentally kept the saving in. I'll see about removing it assuming we don't decide later to put a call on the fast path.
quoted
+ + get_thread_info x0 + ldr x1, [x0, #TSK_TI_LOWEST_STACK] + + /* get the number of bytes to check for lowest stack */ + mov x3, x1 + and x3, x3, #THREAD_SIZE - 1 + lsr x3, x3, #3 + + /* generate addresses from the bottom of the stack */ + mov x4, sp + movn x2, #THREAD_SIZE - 1 + and x1, x4, x2Can we replace the MOVN;AND with a single instruction to clear the low bits? e.g. mov x4, sp bic x1, x4, #THREAD_SIZE - 1 ... IIUC BIC is an alias for the bitfield instructions, though I can't recall exactly which one(s).
Good suggestion.
quoted
+ + mov x2, #STACKLEAK_POISON + + mov x5, #0 +1: + /* + * As borrowed from the x86 logic, start from the lowest_stack + * and go to the bottom to find the poison value. + * The check of 16 is to hopefully avoid false positives. + */ + cbz x3, 4f + ldr x4, [x1, x3, lsl #3] + cmp x4, x2 + csinc x5, xzr, x5, ne + tbnz x5, #STACKLEAK_POISON_CHECK_DEPTH/4, 4f // found 16 poisons? + sub x3, x3, #1 + b 1b + +4: + /* total number of bytes to poison */ + add x5, x1, x3, lsl #3 + mov x4, sp + sub x8, x4, x5 + + cmp x8, #THREAD_SIZE // sanity check the range + b.lo 5f + ASM_BUG() + +5: + /* + * We may have hit a path where the stack did not get used, + * no need to do anything here + */ + cbz x8, 7f + + sub x8, x8, #1 // don't poison the current stack pointer + + lsr x8, x8, #3 + add x3, x3, x8 + + /* + * The logic of this loop ensures the last stack word isn't + * ovewritten. + */Is that to ensure that we don't clobber the word at the current sp value?
Correct.
quoted
+6: + cbz x8, 7f + str x2, [x1, x3, lsl #3] + sub x3, x3, #1 + sub x8, x8, #1 + b 6b + + /* Reset the lowest stack to the top of the stack */ +7: + mov x1, sp + str x1, [x0, #TSK_TI_LOWEST_STACK] + + mov x0, x10 + ret +ENDPROC(__erase_kstack) +#endif[...]quoted
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/Makefile index 7b3ba40f0745..35ebbc1b17ff 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/Makefile +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/Makefile@@ -20,7 +20,8 @@ cflags-$(CONFIG_EFI_ARMSTUB) += -I$(srctree)/scripts/dtc/libfdt KBUILD_CFLAGS := $(cflags-y) -DDISABLE_BRANCH_PROFILING \ -D__NO_FORTIFY \ $(call cc-option,-ffreestanding) \ - $(call cc-option,-fno-stack-protector) + $(call cc-option,-fno-stack-protector) \ + $(DISABLE_STACKLEAK_PLUGIN)I believe the KVM hyp code will also need to opt-out of this.
I'll double check that.
Thanks, Mark.
Thanks, Laura