[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1oJjzOh1fRh+0gYDcf27pCTVwwfQcb2DPfx7tmwQE2Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 17:55:19 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: fix randomized task_struct
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
<ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
>> On 30 Jun 2017, at 15:34, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>>
>> With the new task struct randomization, we can run into a build
>> failure for certain random seeds:
>>
>> arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S: Assembler messages:
>> arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S:803: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4096)
>>
>> Only two constants in asm-offset.h are affected, and I'm changing
>> both of them here to work correctly in all configurations.
>>
>> One more macro has the problem, but is currently unused, so this
>> removes it instead of adding complexity.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
>> Fixes: c33d8b12fbbd ("task_struct: Allow randomized layout")
>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S | 5 ++++-
>> arch/arm/mm/proc-macros.S | 10 ++++------
>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S b/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S
>> index 9f157e7c51e7..db6d22b23bd8 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S
>> @@ -797,7 +797,10 @@ ENTRY(__switch_to)
>> #if defined(CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR) && !defined(CONFIG_SMP)
>> ldr r7, [r2, #TI_TASK]
>> ldr r8, =__stack_chk_guard
>> - ldr r7, [r7, #TSK_STACK_CANARY]
>> + .if (TSK_STACK_CANARY > PAGE_MASK)
>
> Shouldn't this be ~PAGE_MASK?
>
> I think
>
> .if (TSK_STACK_CANARY & PAGE_MASK) != 0
>
> is better and clearer as well
Right, sorry about that. Russell also pointed out that PAGE_MASK
is not the best constant for this, as the MMU page size is independent
of the definition of the immediate arguments. I'll fix both and resend.
Arnd
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.
