From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: x86-64: Maintain 16-byte stack alignment
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 17:46:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXom8aY2XhpAyOtAwQQYF7wftBHJE_px1xr0iRmcYEJoA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170112201511.yj5ekqmj76r2yv6t@treble>
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:08:07PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Linus Torvalds
>> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Just to clarify, I think you're asking if, for versions of gcc which
>> >> don't support -mpreferred-stack-boundary=3, objtool can analyze all C
>> >> functions to ensure their stacks are 16-byte aligned.
>> >>
>> >> It's certainly possible, but I don't see how that solves the problem.
>> >> The stack will still be misaligned by entry code. Or am I missing
>> >> something?
>> >
>> > I think the argument is that we *could* try to align things, if we
>> > just had some tool that actually then verified that we aren't missing
>> > anything.
>> >
>> > I'm not entirely happy with checking the generated code, though,
>> > because as Ingo says, you have a 50:50 chance of just getting it right
>> > by mistake. So I'd much rather have some static tool that checks
>> > things at a code level (ie coccinelle or sparse).
>>
>> What I meant was checking the entry code to see if it aligns stack
>> frames, and good luck getting sparse to do that. Hmm, getting 16-byte
>> alignment for real may actually be entirely a lost cause. After all,
>> I think we have some inline functions that do asm volatile ("call
>> ..."), and I don't see any credible way of forcing alignment short of
>> generating an entirely new stack frame and aligning that.
>
> Actually we already found all such cases and fixed them by forcing a new
> stack frame, thanks to objtool. For example, see 55a76b59b5fe.
What I mean is: what guarantees that the stack is properly aligned for
the subroutine call? gcc promises to set up a stack frame, but does
it promise that rsp will be properly aligned to call a C function?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-13 1:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-10 14:33 x86-64: Maintain 16-byte stack alignment Herbert Xu
2017-01-10 14:39 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-10 17:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-01-10 17:09 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-11 3:11 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-11 3:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-01-11 4:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-01-11 4:35 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-11 6:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-12 6:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-12 7:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-12 14:02 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-01-12 19:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-01-12 20:08 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-12 20:15 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-01-12 20:55 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-01-12 21:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-01-13 8:38 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-13 1:46 ` Andy Lutomirski [this message]
2017-01-13 3:11 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-01-13 3:23 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-13 4:27 ` Josh Poimboeuf
[not found] ` <CA+55aFzRrSwGxxfZk-RUEnsz=xhcSmOwE1CenfCPBWtsS9MwDw@mail.gmail.com>
2017-01-13 5:07 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-01-13 8:43 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-13 8:42 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-13 8:39 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-13 8:36 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-13 13:07 ` Josh Poimboeuf
[not found] ` <CA+55aFw+Z_ieo6DzTVB6_-TvQ0jj60s=T0mvXfqkBVFdKFPw_Q@mail.gmail.com>
2017-01-11 8:06 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-01-11 8:09 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-11 18:20 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-12 7:05 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-12 7:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-12 14:49 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-01-12 7:51 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-12 8:04 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-12 8:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-12 15:03 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-01-12 15:06 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-12 15:18 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-01-12 15:10 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-01-10 17:30 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-01-10 19:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-10 19:16 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-01-10 19:22 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-10 20:00 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-01-10 23:25 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-11 3:26 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-11 3:26 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-11 3:16 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-11 3:15 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-12 6:12 ` Herbert Xu
2017-01-12 8:01 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-01-12 8:06 ` Herbert Xu
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=CALCETrXom8aY2XhpAyOtAwQQYF7wftBHJE_px1xr0iRmcYEJoA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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).