On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 7:48 PM Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> list_for_each_entry() selects either the correct value (pos) or a safe
> value for the additional mispredicted iteration (NULL) for the list
> iterator.
> list_for_each_entry() calls select_nospec(), which performs
> a branch-less select.
>
> On x86, this select is performed via a cmov. Otherwise, it's performed
> via various shift/mask/etc. operations.
>
> Kasper Acknowledgements: Jakob Koschel, Brian Johannesmeyer, Kaveh
> Razavi, Herbert Bos, Cristiano Giuffrida from the VUSec group at VU
> Amsterdam.
>
> Co-developed-by: Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@xxxxxxxxx>
Yeah, I think this is the best way to do this without deeply intrusive
changes to how lists are represented in memory.
Some notes on the specific implementation:
> arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h | 12 ++++++++++++
> include/linux/list.h | 3 ++-
> include/linux/nospec.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
> index 35389b2af88e..722797ad74e2 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
> @@ -48,6 +48,18 @@ static inline unsigned long array_index_mask_nospec(unsigned long index,
> /* Override the default implementation from linux/nospec.h. */
> #define array_index_mask_nospec array_index_mask_nospec
>
> +/* Override the default implementation from linux/nospec.h. */
> +#define select_nospec(cond, exptrue, expfalse) \
> +({ \
> + typeof(exptrue) _out = (exptrue); \
> + \
> + asm volatile("test %1, %1\n\t" \
This shouldn't need "volatile", because it is only necessary if _out
is actually used. Using "volatile" here could prevent optimizing out
useless code. OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR() also doesn't use "volatile".
> + "cmove %2, %0" \
> + : "+r" (_out) \
> + : "r" (cond), "r" (expfalse)); \
> + _out; \
> +})
I guess the idea is probably to also add code like this for other
important architectures, in particular arm64?
It might also be a good idea to rename the arch-overridable macro to
something like "arch_select_nospec" and then have a wrapper macro in
include/linux/nospec.h that takes care of type safety issues.
The current definition of the macro doesn't warn if you pass in
incompatible pointer types, like this:
int *bogus_pointer_mix(int cond, int *a, long *b) {
return select_nospec(cond, a, b);
}
and if you pass in integers of different sizes, it may silently
truncate to the size of the smaller one - this C code:
long wrong_int_conversion(int cond, int a, long b) {
return select_nospec(cond, a, b);
}
generates this assembly:
wrong_int_conversion:
test %edi, %edi
cmove %rdx, %esi
movslq %esi, %rax
ret
It might be a good idea to add something like a
static_assert(__same_type(...), ...) to protect against that.
> /* Prevent speculative execution past this barrier. */
> #define barrier_nospec() alternative("", "lfence", X86_FEATURE_LFENCE_RDTSC)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/list.h b/include/linux/list.h
> index dd6c2041d09c..1a1b39fdd122 100644
> --- a/include/linux/list.h
> +++ b/include/linux/list.h
> @@ -636,7 +636,8 @@ static inline void list_splice_tail_init(struct list_head *list,
> */
> #define list_for_each_entry(pos, head, member) \
> for (pos = list_first_entry(head, typeof(*pos), member); \
> - !list_entry_is_head(pos, head, member); \
> + ({ bool _cond = !list_entry_is_head(pos, head, member); \
> + pos = select_nospec(_cond, pos, NULL); _cond; }); \
> pos = list_next_entry(pos, member))
I wonder if it'd look nicer to write it roughly like this:
#define NOSPEC_TYPE_CHECK(_guarded_var, _cond) \
({ \
bool __cond = (_cond); \
typeof(_guarded_var) *__guarded_var = &(_guarded_var); \
*__guarded_var = select_nospec(__cond, *__guarded_var, NULL); \
__cond; \
})
#define list_for_each_entry(pos, head, member) \
for (pos = list_first_entry(head, typeof(*pos), member); \
NOSPEC_TYPE_CHECK(head, !list_entry_is_head(pos, head, member)); \
pos = list_next_entry(pos, member))
I think having a NOSPEC_TYPE_CHECK() like this makes it semantically
clearer, and easier to add in other places? But I don't know if the
others agree...
> /**
> diff --git a/include/linux/nospec.h b/include/linux/nospec.h
> index c1e79f72cd89..ca8ed81e4f9e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/nospec.h
> +++ b/include/linux/nospec.h
> @@ -67,4 +67,20 @@ int arch_prctl_spec_ctrl_set(struct task_struct *task, unsigned long which,
> /* Speculation control for seccomp enforced mitigation */
> void arch_seccomp_spec_mitigate(struct task_struct *task);
>
> +/**
> + * select_nospec - select a value without using a branch; equivalent to:
> + * cond ? exptrue : expfalse;
> + */
> +#ifndef select_nospec
> +#define select_nospec(cond, exptrue, expfalse) \
> +({ \
> + unsigned long _t = (unsigned long) (exptrue); \
> + unsigned long _f = (unsigned long) (expfalse); \
> + unsigned long _c = (unsigned long) (cond); \
> + OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR(_c); \
> + unsigned long _m = -((_c | -_c) >> (BITS_PER_LONG - 1)); \
> + (typeof(exptrue)) ((_t & _m) | (_f & ~_m)); \
> +})
> +#endif
(As a sidenote, it might be easier to implement a conditional zeroing
primitive than a generic conditional select primitive if that's all
you need, something like:
#define cond_nullptr_nospec(_cond, _exp) \
({ \
unsigned long __exp = (unsigned long)(_exp); \
unsigned long _mask = 0UL - !(_cond); \
OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR(_mask); \
(typeof(_exp)) (_mask & __exp); \
})
)
