Thread (79 messages) 79 messages, 10 authors, 2018-11-14

Re: [PATCH v5 04/27] x86/fpu/xstate: Add XSAVES system states for shadow stack

From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Date: 2018-11-08 22:01:07
Also in: linux-api, linux-arch, linux-mm, lkml

On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 01:48:54PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 11/8/18 1:22 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
quoted
quoted
+struct cet_kernel_state {
+       u64 kernel_ssp; /* kernel shadow stack */
+       u64 pl1_ssp;    /* ring-1 shadow stack */
+       u64 pl2_ssp;    /* ring-2 shadow stack */
+} __packed;
+
Why are these __packed?  It seems like it'll generate bad code for no
obvious purpose.
It's a hardware-defined in-memory structure.  Granted, we'd need a
really wonky compiler to make that anything *other* than a nicely-packed
24-byte structure, but the __packed makes it explicit.

It is probably a really useful long-term thing to stop using __packed
and start using "__hw_defined" or something that #defines down to __packed.
packed doesn't mean "don't leave gaps".  It means:

'packed'
     The 'packed' attribute specifies that a variable or structure field
     should have the smallest possible alignment--one byte for a
     variable, and one bit for a field, unless you specify a larger
     value with the 'aligned' attribute.

So Andy's right.  It tells the compiler, "this struct will not be naturally aligned, it will be aligned to a 1-byte boundary".  Which is silly.  If we have

struct b {
	unsigned long x;
} __packed;

struct a {
	char c;
	struct b b;
};

we want struct b to start at offset 8, but with __packed, it will start
at offset 1.

Delete __packed.  It doesn't do what you think it does.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help