[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu8gFSSYV5-11bZOMnQGMcvx0gSDnTpibciEPMv_3HpAUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:27:50 +0100
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...oraproject.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 07/10] arm64: kernel: switch to register x18 as a task
struct pointer
On 13 July 2017 at 11:41, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 03:44:20PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> In order to free up sp_el0, which we will need to deal with faulting
>> stack accesses when using virtually mapped stacks, switch to register
>> x18 as the task struct register. This is permitted by the AAPCS64 ABI,
>> and simplifies many references to 'current', given that they no longer
>> involve a MSR instruction to access SP_EL0.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
>
> [...]
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/current.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/current.h
>> index f6580d4afb0e..b4e3acff699c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/current.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/current.h
>> @@ -13,11 +13,9 @@ struct task_struct;
>> */
>> static __always_inline struct task_struct *get_current(void)
>> {
>> - unsigned long sp_el0;
>> + register unsigned long tsk asm ("x18");
>>
>> - asm ("mrs %0, sp_el0" : "=r" (sp_el0));
>> -
>> - return (struct task_struct *)sp_el0;
>> + return (struct task_struct *)tsk;
>
> Nit:
>
> You're explicitly returning an uninitialised variable here: the asm
> annotation doesn't change the fact that tsk lifetime is that of the
> function. Sufficiently aggressive GCC can probably optimise the whole
> thing (and any caller) away as undefined behaviour.
>
> The GCC docs say
>
> "The only supported use for [specifying registers for local variables]
> is to specify registers for input and output operands when calling
> Extended 'asm'".
>
Ah ok, so it needs to live outside of the function, just like
current_stack_pointer.
>
> As an alternative, you could make tsk a global register variable. I
> don't know whether it should be volatile or not in that case --
> probably not, since it's constant for a given thread.
>
> Alternatively, the following should work:
>
> unsigned long ret;
>
> asm ("mrs %0, x18" : "=r" (ret));
>
> return ret;
>
> (with -ffixed-x18, naturally).
>
Indeed (assuming you meant mov not mrs)
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.
