kernel-hardening.lists.openwall.com archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@chromium.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
	 Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@linux.intel.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	 Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,  Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
	 LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 04/11] x86/entry/64: Adapt assembly for PIE support
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019 08:35:09 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJcbSZHLcSN4BK=N7M3Kv9q-hkPe6dDxbHaRCG9v2JVwhSZxfw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191206102649.GC2844@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 2:27 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 09:01:50AM -0800, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 1:04 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 04:09:41PM -0800, Thomas Garnier wrote:
> > >
> > > > @@ -1625,7 +1627,11 @@ first_nmi:
> > > >       addq    $8, (%rsp)      /* Fix up RSP */
> > > >       pushfq                  /* RFLAGS */
> > > >       pushq   $__KERNEL_CS    /* CS */
> > > > -     pushq   $1f             /* RIP */
> > > > +     pushq   $0              /* Future return address */
> > >
> > > We're building an IRET frame, the IRET frame does not have a 'future
> > > return address' field.
> >
> > I assumed that's the target RIP after iretq.
>
> It is. But it's still the (R)IP field of the IRET frame. Calling it
> anything else is just confusing. The frame is 5 words: SS, (R)SP, (R)FLAGS,
> CS, (R)IP.
>
> > > > +     pushq   %rdx            /* Save RAX */
> > > > +     leaq    1f(%rip), %rdx  /* RIP */
> > >
> > > nonsensical comment
> >
> > That was the same comment from the push $1f that I changed.
>
> Yes, but there it made sense since the PUSH actually created that field
> of the frame, here it is nonsensical. What this instruction does is put
> the address of the '1f' label into RDX, which is then stuck into the
> (R)IP field on the next instruction.

Got it, make sense. Thanks.

>
> > > > +     movq    %rdx, 8(%rsp)   /* Put 1f on return address */
> > > > +     popq    %rdx            /* Restore RAX */

  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-06 16:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-05  0:09 [PATCH v10 00/11] x86: PIE support to extend KASLR randomization Thomas Garnier
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 01/11] x86/crypto: Adapt assembly for PIE support Thomas Garnier
2019-12-18 12:46   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-12-18 16:35     ` Thomas Garnier
2019-12-18 16:45       ` Borislav Petkov
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 02/11] x86: Add macro to get symbol address " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 03/11] x86: relocate_kernel - Adapt assembly " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 04/11] x86/entry/64: " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-05  9:03   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-05 17:01     ` Thomas Garnier
2019-12-06 10:26       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-06 16:35         ` Thomas Garnier [this message]
2019-12-20 16:05           ` Borislav Petkov
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 05/11] x86: pm-trace - " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 06/11] x86/CPU: " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 07/11] x86/acpi: " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 08/11] x86/boot/64: " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 09/11] x86/power/64: " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 10/11] x86/paravirt: " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-23 17:23   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-12-24 10:04     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-12-05  0:09 ` [PATCH v10 11/11] x86/alternatives: " Thomas Garnier
2019-12-19 13:34 ` [PATCH v10 00/11] x86: PIE support to extend KASLR randomization Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-19 16:35   ` Thomas Garnier
2019-12-24 13:03 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-12-30 18:52   ` Kees Cook

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAJcbSZHLcSN4BK=N7M3Kv9q-hkPe6dDxbHaRCG9v2JVwhSZxfw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=thgarnie@chromium.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=kristen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).