From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin Schwidefsky Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] syscalls: Verify address limit before returning to user-mode Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 07:28:02 +0200 Message-ID: <20170512072802.5a686f23@mschwideX1> References: <20170428153213.137279-1-thgarnie@google.com> <20170508073352.caqe3fqf7nuxypgi@gmail.com> <20170508075209.7aluvpwildw325rf@gmail.com> <1494256932.1167.1.camel@gmail.com> <20170509065619.wmqa6z6w3n6xpvrw@gmail.com> <20170509111007.GA14702@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Thomas Garnier , Greg KH , Ingo Molnar , Kees Cook , Daniel Micay , Heiko Carstens , Dave Hansen , Arnd Bergmann , Thomas Gleixner , David Howells , =?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6k=?= Nyffenegger , Andrew Morton , "Paul E . McKenney" , "Eric W . Biederman" , Oleg Nesterov , Pavel Tikhomirov , Ingo Molnar , "H . Peter Anvin" , Andy Lutomirski Paolo Bonzini

List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 11 May 2017 16:44:07 -0700 Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Thomas Garnier wrote: > > > > Ingo: Do you want the change as-is? Would you like it to be optional? > > What do you think? > > I'm not ingo, but I don't like that patch. It's in the wrong place - > that system call return code is too timing-critical to add address > limit checks. > > Now what I think you *could* do is: > > - make "set_fs()" actually set a work flag in the current thread flags > > - do the test in the slow-path (syscall_return_slowpath). > > Yes, yes, that ends up being architecture-specific, but it's fairly simple. > > And it only slows down the system calls that actually use "set_fs()". > Sure, it will slow those down a fair amount, but they are hopefully a > small subset of all cases. > > How does that sound to people? Thats' where we currently do that > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) && > WARN(irqs_disabled(), "syscall %ld left IRQs disabled", > regs->orig_ax)) > local_irq_enable(); > > check too, which is a fairly similar issue. This is exactly what Heiko did for the s390 backend as a result of this discussion. See the _CIF_ASCE_SECONDARY bit in arch/s390/kernel/entry.S, for the hot patch the check for the bit is included in the general _CIF_WORK test. Only the slow patch gets a bit slower. git commit b5a882fcf146c87cb6b67c6df353e1c042b8773d "s390: restore address space when returning to user space". -- blue skies, Martin. "Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.