Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] x86: Use static_cpu_has in uaccess region to avoid instrumentation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 11:44 AM Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Gentle ping.  I would appreciate quick feedback if this approach is reasonable.
>
> Peter: since you suggested that we should not change objtool, did you
> have a particular approach in mind that is maybe different from v2 and
> v3? Or is this what you were thinking of?
>
> Many thanks!
>
> On Fri, 31 May 2019 at 17:11, Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > This patch is a pre-requisite for enabling KASAN bitops instrumentation;
> > using static_cpu_has instead of boot_cpu_has avoids instrumentation of
> > test_bit inside the uaccess region. With instrumentation, the KASAN
> > check would otherwise be flagged by objtool.
> >
> > For consistency, kernel/signal.c was changed to mirror this change,
> > however, is never instrumented with KASAN (currently unsupported under
> > x86 32bit).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Suggested-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Changes in v3:
> > * Use static_cpu_has instead of moving boot_cpu_has outside uaccess
> >   region.
> >
> > Changes in v2:
> > * Replaces patch: 'tools/objtool: add kasan_check_* to uaccess
> >   whitelist'
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/ia32/ia32_signal.c | 2 +-
> >  arch/x86/kernel/signal.c    | 2 +-
> >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/ia32/ia32_signal.c b/arch/x86/ia32/ia32_signal.c
> > index 629d1ee05599..1cee10091b9f 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/ia32/ia32_signal.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/ia32/ia32_signal.c
> > @@ -358,7 +358,7 @@ int ia32_setup_rt_frame(int sig, struct ksignal *ksig,
> >                 put_user_ex(ptr_to_compat(&frame->uc), &frame->puc);
> >
> >                 /* Create the ucontext.  */
> > -               if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_XSAVE))
> > +               if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_XSAVE))


Peter Z or A, does it look good to you? Could you please Ack this?


> >                         put_user_ex(UC_FP_XSTATE, &frame->uc.uc_flags);
> >                 else
> >                         put_user_ex(0, &frame->uc.uc_flags);
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
> > index 364813cea647..52eb1d551aed 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
> > @@ -391,7 +391,7 @@ static int __setup_rt_frame(int sig, struct ksignal *ksig,
> >                 put_user_ex(&frame->uc, &frame->puc);
> >
> >                 /* Create the ucontext.  */
> > -               if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_XSAVE))
> > +               if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_XSAVE))
> >                         put_user_ex(UC_FP_XSTATE, &frame->uc.uc_flags);
> >                 else
> >                         put_user_ex(0, &frame->uc.uc_flags);
> > --
> > 2.22.0.rc1.257.g3120a18244-goog
> >



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux