Re: [PATCH v23 9/9] x86/vdso: Add ENDBR to __vdso_sgx_enter_enclave

From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
To: "Yu, Yu-cheng" <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@redhat.com>,
	Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
	"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
	Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@intel.com>,
	Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	Weijiang Yang <weijiang.yang@intel.com>,
	Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@intel.com>,
	Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v23 9/9] x86/vdso: Add ENDBR to __vdso_sgx_enter_enclave
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 03:42:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YFFedzHcV/zL883v@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b523b794-3553-f7bb-3a69-24d936f0fefa@intel.com>

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 12:27:19PM -0700, Yu, Yu-cheng wrote:
> On 3/16/2021 12:22 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 08:13:19AM -0700, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> > > ENDBR is a special new instruction for the Indirect Branch Tracking (IBT)
> > > component of CET.  IBT prevents attacks by ensuring that (most) indirect
> > > branches and function calls may only land at ENDBR instructions.  Branches
> > > that don't follow the rules will result in control flow (#CF) exceptions.
> > > 
> > > ENDBR is a noop when IBT is unsupported or disabled.  Most ENDBR
> > > instructions are inserted automatically by the compiler, but branch
> > > targets written in assembly must have ENDBR added manually.
> > > 
> > > Add ENDBR to __vdso_sgx_enter_enclave() branch targets.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
> > > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> > > Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
> > > Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
> > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > > ---
> > >   arch/x86/entry/vdso/vsgx.S | 4 ++++
> > >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/vsgx.S b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/vsgx.S
> > > index 86a0e94f68df..1baa9b49053e 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/vsgx.S
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/vsgx.S
> > > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> > >   #include <asm/enclu.h>
> > >   #include "extable.h"
> > > +#include "../calling.h"
> > >   /* Relative to %rbp. */
> > >   #define SGX_ENCLAVE_OFFSET_OF_RUN		16
> > > @@ -27,6 +28,7 @@
> > >   SYM_FUNC_START(__vdso_sgx_enter_enclave)
> > >   	/* Prolog */
> > >   	.cfi_startproc
> > > +	ENDBR
> > >   	push	%rbp
> > >   	.cfi_adjust_cfa_offset	8
> > >   	.cfi_rel_offset		%rbp, 0
> > > @@ -62,6 +64,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(__vdso_sgx_enter_enclave)
> > >   .Lasync_exit_pointer:
> > >   .Lenclu_eenter_eresume:
> > >   	enclu
> > > +	ENDBR
> > >   	/* EEXIT jumps here unless the enclave is doing something fancy. */
> > >   	mov	SGX_ENCLAVE_OFFSET_OF_RUN(%rbp), %rbx
> > > @@ -91,6 +94,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(__vdso_sgx_enter_enclave)
> > >   	jmp	.Lout
> > >   .Lhandle_exception:
> > > +	ENDBR
> > >   	mov	SGX_ENCLAVE_OFFSET_OF_RUN(%rbp), %rbx
> > >   	/* Set the exception info. */
> > > -- 
> > > 2.21.0
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > Looks good to me.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
> 
> Thanks for reviewing.  In response to Dave's and Boris' comments, I will
> replace ENDBR macro with _CET_ENDBR that comes from the compiler.  Can I
> still keep the Reviewed-by?

I'll rather re-ack, thanks. Most likely give reviewed-by but I always
prefer to see the code change before doing that.

/Jarkko