linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	ruscur@russell.cc, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: GCC bug ? Re: [PATCH v2 10/10] powerpc/32s: Implement Kernel Userspace Access Protection
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 07:52:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <af9ad296-401c-cb5c-868a-7a6f91d1e8bc@c-s.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200121195501.GJ3191@gate.crashing.org>



Le 21/01/2020 à 20:55, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 05:22:32PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> g1() should return 3, not 5.
> 
> What makes you say that?

What makes me say that is that NULL is obviously a constant pointer and 
I think we are all expecting gcc to see it as a constant during kernel 
build, ie at -O2

> 
> "A return of 0 does not indicate that the
>   value is _not_ a constant, but merely that GCC cannot prove it is a
>   constant with the specified value of the '-O' option."
> 
> (And the rules it uses for this are *not* the same as C "constant
> expressions" or C "integer constant expression" or C "arithmetic
> constant expression" or anything like that -- which should be already
> obvious from that it changes with different -Ox).
> 
> You can use builtin_constant_p to have the compiler do something better
> if the compiler feels like it, but not anything more.  Often people
> want stronger guarantees, but when they see how much less often it then
> returns "true", they do not want that either.
> 

in asm/book3s/64/kup-radix.h we have:

static inline void allow_user_access(void __user *to, const void __user 
*from,
				     unsigned long size)
{
	// This is written so we can resolve to a single case at build time
	if (__builtin_constant_p(to) && to == NULL)
		set_kuap(AMR_KUAP_BLOCK_WRITE);
	else if (__builtin_constant_p(from) && from == NULL)
		set_kuap(AMR_KUAP_BLOCK_READ);
	else
		set_kuap(0);
}

and in asm/kup.h we have:

static inline void allow_read_from_user(const void __user *from, 
unsigned long size)
{
	allow_user_access(NULL, from, size);
}

static inline void allow_write_to_user(void __user *to, unsigned long size)
{
	allow_user_access(to, NULL, size);
}


If GCC doesn't see NULL as a constant, then the above doesn't work as 
expected.

What's surprising and frustrating is that if you remove the 
__builtin_constant_p() and only leave the NULL check, then GCC sees it 
as a constant and drops the other leg.

So if we remove the __builtin_constant_p(to) and leave only the (to == 
NULL), it will work as expected for allow_read_from_user(). But for the 
others where (to) is not a constant, the NULL test will remain together 
with the associated leg.

Christophe

  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-22  6:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-11  8:30 [PATCH v2 00/10] Kernel Userspace protection for PPC32 Christophe Leroy
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 01/10] powerpc/6xx: fix setup and use of SPRN_SPRG_PGDIR for hash32 Christophe Leroy
2019-03-20 13:04   ` [v2, " Michael Ellerman
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 02/10] powerpc/mm: Detect bad KUAP faults (Squash of v5 series) Christophe Leroy
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 03/10] powerpc/32: Remove MSR_PR test when returning from syscall Christophe Leroy
2019-04-21 14:18   ` [v2, " Michael Ellerman
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 04/10] powerpc/32: Prepare for Kernel Userspace Access Protection Christophe Leroy
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 05/10] powerpc/8xx: Only define APG0 and APG1 Christophe Leroy
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 06/10] powerpc/8xx: Add Kernel Userspace Execution Prevention Christophe Leroy
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 07/10] powerpc/8xx: Add Kernel Userspace Access Protection Christophe Leroy
2019-04-18  6:53   ` Michael Ellerman
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 08/10] powerpc/32s: Implement Kernel Userspace Execution Prevention Christophe Leroy
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 09/10] powerpc/32s: Prepare Kernel Userspace Access Protection Christophe Leroy
2019-03-11  8:30 ` [PATCH v2 10/10] powerpc/32s: Implement " Christophe Leroy
2019-04-18  6:55   ` Michael Ellerman
2019-04-23  9:26     ` Christophe Leroy
2020-01-21 17:22     ` GCC bug ? " Christophe Leroy
2020-01-21 19:55       ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-01-22  6:52         ` Christophe Leroy [this message]
2020-01-22 13:36           ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-01-22 14:45             ` Christophe Leroy
2020-01-22  6:57         ` Christophe Leroy
2020-01-22 13:18           ` Segher Boessenkool

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=af9ad296-401c-cb5c-868a-7a6f91d1e8bc@c-s.fr \
    --to=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=ruscur@russell.cc \
    --cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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).