|
Message-ID: <20170207111011.GB28790@leverpostej> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 11:10:12 +0000 From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>, Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 4/4] refcount: Report failures through CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:34:05AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 08:54:38AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > > > > > > Like I wrote, ideally we'd end up using something like the x86 exception > > > table with a custom handler. Just no idea how to pull that off without > > > doing a full blown arch specific implementation, so I didn't go there > > > quite yet. > > > > I haven't spent much time looking at the extable stuff. (Though > > coincidentally, I was poking at it for x86's test_nx stuff...) I > > thought there was a way to build arch-agnostic extables already? > > kernel/extable.c is unconditionally built-in, for example. > > That doesn't seem to be of much use. It only contains section sort and > search functions. > > Another problem for generic code would be to figure out what register > the relevant variable would live in at the time of exception. Here its > 'obviously' EAX because that's what cmpxchg requires, but in generic > you'd need a means of querying GCC's register allocator at the exception > point and somehow using that information for the generation of the > exception handler. I think we only need two arch-specific primitives: (a) mangle a GCC assigned register into an idx stored in the extable (b) take said index, and grab the relevant register from pt_regs Then you can have a BUG_VALUE(v, ...), where we use an input "r" (val), and mangle that into the idx in the extable. In the common case, I'd hope GCC would leave the register in-place from the cmpxchg. ... or have I misundertood? :) Thanks, Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.