[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLc_A1w4FM8FvQHGSPjLfOu80L_vbt_FkcE6+Bh_XMjxw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 21:14:41 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Patrick McLean <chutzpah@...too.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Bruce Fields <bfields@...hat.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [nfsd4] potentially hardware breaking regression in 4.14-rc and 4.13.11
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Patrick McLean <chutzpah@...too.org> wrote:
> On 2017-11-17 04:55 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Patrick McLean <chutzpah@...too.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> I am still getting the crash at d9e12200852d, I figured I would
>>> double-check the "good" and "bad" kernels before starting a full bisect.
>>
>> .. but without GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT it's solid?
>
> Yes, without GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT it's solid.
That's strange. With d9e12200852d the shuffle_seed variables won't
ever actually get used. (i.e. I wouldn't expect the seed to change any
behavior.)
Can you confirm with something like this:
diff --git a/scripts/gcc-plugins/randomize_layout_plugin.c
b/scripts/gcc-plugins/randomize_layout_plugin.c
index cdaac8c66734..aac570a57d7d 100644
--- a/scripts/gcc-plugins/randomize_layout_plugin.c
+++ b/scripts/gcc-plugins/randomize_layout_plugin.c
@@ -267,12 +267,10 @@ static void shuffle(const_tree type, tree
*newtree, unsigned long length)
structname = ORIG_TYPE_NAME(type);
-#ifdef __DEBUG_PLUGIN
fprintf(stderr, "Shuffling struct %s %p\n", (const char
*)structname, type);
#ifdef __DEBUG_VERBOSE
debug_tree((tree)type);
#endif
-#endif
for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
seed[i] = shuffle_seed[i];
You should see no reports of "Shuffling struct ..."
And if it reports nothing, and you're on d9e12200852d, can you confirm
that switching to a "good" seed fixes it? (If it _does_, then I
suspect a build artifact being left behind or something odd like
that.)
>> Kees removed even the baseline "randomize pure function pointer
>> structures", so at that commit, nothing should be randomized.
>>
>> But maybe the plugin code itself ends up confusing gcc somehow?
>>
>> Even when it doesn't actually do that "relayout_struct()" on the
>> structure, it always does those TYPE_ATTRIBUTES() games.
FWIW, myself doing a build at d9e12200852d with and without
GCC_PLUGIN_RANDSTRUCT _appears_ to produce identical objdump output
where I did spot-checks.
Also, do you have any other plugins enabled? (Can you send your .config?)
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
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.
