From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: rkir@google.com
Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, pavel@ucw.cz, tglx@linutronix.de,
mingo@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, ndesaulniers@google.com,
adelva@google.com, Haitao Shan <hshan@google.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: x86: power: cpu: init %gs before __restore_processor_state (clang)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 19:46:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200915174643.GT14436@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200915172658.1432732-1-rkir@google.com>
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 10:26:58AM -0700, rkir@google.com wrote:
> From: Haitao Shan <hshan@google.com>
>
> This is a workaround which fixes triple fault
> in __restore_processor_state on clang when
> built with LTO.
>
> When load_TR_desc and load_mm_ldt are inlined into
> fix_processor_context due to LTO, they cause
> fix_processor_context (or in this case __restore_processor_state,
> as fix_processor_context was inlined into __restore_processor_state)
> to access the stack canary through %gs, but before
> __restore_processor_state has restored the previous value
> of %gs properly. LLVM appears to be inlining functions with stack
> protectors into functions compiled with -fno-stack-protector,
> which is likely a bug in LLVM's inliner that needs to be fixed.
>
> The LLVM bug is here: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47479
>
> Signed-off-by: Haitao Shan <hshan@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Roman Kiryanov <rkir@google.com>
Ok, google guys, pls make sure you Cc LKML too as this is where *all*
patches and discussions are archived. Adding it now to Cc.
> ---
> arch/x86/power/cpu.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/power/cpu.c b/arch/x86/power/cpu.c
> index db1378c6ff26..e5677adb2d28 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/power/cpu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/power/cpu.c
> @@ -274,6 +274,16 @@ static void notrace __restore_processor_state(struct saved_context *ctxt)
> /* Needed by apm.c */
> void notrace restore_processor_state(void)
> {
> +#ifdef __clang__
> + // The following code snippet is copied from __restore_processor_state.
> + // Its purpose is to prepare GS segment before the function is called.
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> + wrmsrl(MSR_GS_BASE, saved_context.kernelmode_gs_base);
> +#else
> + loadsegment(fs, __KERNEL_PERCPU);
> + loadsegment(gs, __KERNEL_STACK_CANARY);
> +#endif
> +#endif
Ok, so why is the kernel supposed to take yet another ugly workaround
because there's a bug in the compiler?
If it is too late to fix it there, then maybe disable LTO builds for the
buggy version only.
We had a similar discussion this week and we already have one buggy
compiler to deal with and this second one is not making it any easier...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-15 17:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-15 17:26 [PATCH] arch: x86: power: cpu: init %gs before __restore_processor_state (clang) rkir
2020-09-15 17:46 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2020-09-15 17:57 ` Roman Kiryanov
2020-09-15 18:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-09-15 18:36 ` Roman Kiryanov
2020-09-15 18:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-09-15 18:55 ` Roman Kiryanov
2020-09-18 22:25 ` Pavel Machek
2020-09-21 23:28 ` Roman Kiryanov
2020-10-04 9:59 ` Pavel Machek
2020-09-15 18:00 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-09-15 18:25 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-09-15 19:51 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-09-15 20:20 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-09-15 21:49 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-09-16 9:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-09-19 16:48 ` Pavel Machek
2020-09-16 8:17 ` peterz
2020-09-15 20:44 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-09-15 22:17 ` Pavel Machek
2020-09-15 22:21 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-09-18 22:20 ` Pavel Machek
2020-09-15 23:13 ` Roman Kiryanov
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=20200915174643.GT14436@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=adelva@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hshan@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rkir@google.com \
--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).