|
Message-ID: <16a56461-6501-7eb9-e1a4-761c9eff9386@linux.com> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 09:58:32 +0300 From: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com> To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>, Brad Spengler <spender@...ecurity.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@....com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, "Dmitry V . Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>, Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>, "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>, David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Mathias Krause <minipli@...glemail.com>, Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>, Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>, Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@...tuozzo.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, Boris Lukashev <blukashev@...pervictus.com>, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v10 2/6] x86/entry: Add STACKLEAK erasing the kernel stack at the end of syscalls On 29.03.2018 01:55, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 03/28/2018 12:57 PM, Alexander Popov wrote: >> +.macro ERASE_KSTACK >> +#ifdef CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STACKLEAK >> + PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS >> + call erase_kstack >> + POP_REGS >> +#endif >> +.endm > > Thanks again for the hard work to trim down the complexity of the > assembly. Hello Dave, thanks! > I noticed the 64-bit version saves/restores registers while > the 32-bit version doesn't. What's the reasoning there? When erase_kstack() is called from the trampoline stack, it must save and restore any modified registers, since all registers except RDI are live (prepared for the userspace). When erase_kstack() is called from the thread stack, it can clobber registers according the function call convention without any harm. Best regards, Alexander
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.