Re: [RFC PATCH v3 19/24] x86/cet/shstk: Introduce WRUSS instruction
From: Yu-cheng Yu <hidden>
Date: 2018-09-14 20:51:23
Also in:
linux-api, linux-arch, linux-mm, lkml
On Fri, 2018-08-31 at 15:16 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Yu-cheng Yu [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 09:22 -0700, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:quoted
On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 08:55 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:quoted
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 8:39 AM, Jann Horn [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 4:44 PM Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.c omquoted
wrote: WRUSS is a new kernel-mode instruction but writes directly to user shadow stack memory. This is used to construct a return address on the shadow stack for the signal handler. This instruction can fault if the user shadow stack is invalid shadow stack memory. In that case, the kernel does fixup. Signed-off-by: Yu-cheng Yu <redacted>[...]quoted
+static inline int write_user_shstk_64(unsigned long addr, unsigned long val) +{ + int err = 0; + + asm volatile("1: wrussq %1, (%0)\n" + "2:\n" + _ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE(1b, 2b, ex_handler_wruss) + : + : "r" (addr), "r" (val)); + + return err; +}What's up with "err"? You set it to zero, and then you return it, but nothing can ever set it to non-zero, right?quoted
+__visible bool ex_handler_wruss(const struct exception_table_entry *fixup, + struct pt_regs *regs, int trapnr) +{ + regs->ip = ex_fixup_addr(fixup); + regs->ax = -1; + return true; +}And here you just write into regs->ax, but your "asm volatile" doesn't reserve that register. This looks wrong to me. I think you probably want to add something like an explicit `"+&a"(err)` output to the asm statements.We require asm goto support these days. How about using that? You won't even need a special exception handler.Maybe something like this? It looks simple now. static inline int write_user_shstk_64(unsigned long addr, unsigned long val) { asm_volatile_goto("wrussq %1, (%0)\n" "jmp %l[ok]\n" ".section .fixup,\"ax\"n" "jmp %l[fail]\n" ".previous\n" :: "r" (addr), "r" (val) :: ok, fail); ok: return 0; fail: return -1; }I think you can get rid of 'jmp %l[ok]' and the ok label and just fall through. And you don't need an explicit jmp to fail -- just set the _EX_HANDLER entry to land on the fail label.
Thanks! This now looks simple and much better.
Yu-cheng
+static inline int write_user_shstk_64(unsigned long addr, unsigned long val)
+{
+ asm_volatile_goto("1: wrussq %1, (%0)\n"
+ _ASM_EXTABLE(1b, %l[fail])
+ :: "r" (addr), "r" (val)
+ :: fail);
+ return 0;
+fail:
+ return -1;
+}