linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/asm/entry/64: better check for canonical address
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 12:31:25 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150327113125.GA14778@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMzpN2iRhG8vhHEd2AD5LHWi7rQBoqdnVSjnNdkay8HpeJsjFw@mail.gmail.com>


* Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com> wrote:
> > This change makes the check exact (no more false positives
> > on kernel addresses).
> >
> > It isn't really important to be fully correct here -
> > almost all addresses we'll ever see will be userspace ones,
> > but OTOH it looks to be cheap enough:
> > the new code uses two more ALU ops but preserves %rcx,
> > allowing to not reload it from pt_regs->cx again.
> > On disassembly level, the changes are:
> >
> > cmp %rcx,0x80(%rsp) -> mov 0x80(%rsp),%r11; cmp %rcx,%r11
> > shr $0x2f,%rcx      -> shl $0x10,%rcx; sar $0x10,%rcx; cmp %rcx,%r11
> > mov 0x58(%rsp),%rcx -> (eliminated)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
> > CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> > CC: x86@kernel.org
> > CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > ---
> >
> > Andy, I'd undecided myself on the merits of doing this.
> > If you like it, feel free to take it in your tree.
> > I trimmed CC list to not bother too many people with this trivial
> > and quite possibly "useless churn"-class change.
> >
> >  arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S | 23 ++++++++++++-----------
> >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S b/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S
> > index bf9afad..a36d04d 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S
> > @@ -688,26 +688,27 @@ retint_swapgs:            /* return to user-space */
> >          * a completely clean 64-bit userspace context.
> >          */
> >         movq RCX(%rsp),%rcx
> > -       cmpq %rcx,RIP(%rsp)             /* RCX == RIP */
> > +       movq RIP(%rsp),%r11
> > +       cmpq %rcx,%r11                  /* RCX == RIP */
> >         jne opportunistic_sysret_failed
> >
> >         /*
> >          * On Intel CPUs, sysret with non-canonical RCX/RIP will #GP
> >          * in kernel space.  This essentially lets the user take over
> > -        * the kernel, since userspace controls RSP.  It's not worth
> > -        * testing for canonicalness exactly -- this check detects any
> > -        * of the 17 high bits set, which is true for non-canonical
> > -        * or kernel addresses.  (This will pessimize vsyscall=native.
> > -        * Big deal.)
> > +        * the kernel, since userspace controls RSP.
> >          *
> > -        * If virtual addresses ever become wider, this will need
> > +        * If width of "canonical tail" ever become variable, this will need
> >          * to be updated to remain correct on both old and new CPUs.
> >          */
> >         .ifne __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT - 47
> >         .error "virtual address width changed -- sysret checks need update"
> >         .endif
> > -       shr $__VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT, %rcx
> > -       jnz opportunistic_sysret_failed
> > +       /* Change top 16 bits to be a sign-extension of the rest */
> > +       shl     $(64 - (__VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT+1)), %rcx
> > +       sar     $(64 - (__VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT+1)), %rcx
> > +       /* If this changed %rcx, it was not canonical */
> > +       cmpq    %rcx, %r11
> > +       jne     opportunistic_sysret_failed
> >
> >         cmpq $__USER_CS,CS(%rsp)        /* CS must match SYSRET */
> >         jne opportunistic_sysret_failed
> 
> Would it be possible to to skip this check entirely on AMD 
> processors? It's my understanding that AMD correctly issues the #GP 
> from CPL3, causing a stack switch.

This needs a testcase I suspect.

> Looking at the AMD docs, sysret doesn't even check for a canonical 
> address.  The #GP is probably from the instruction fetch at the 
> non-canonical address instead of from sysret itself.

I suspect it's similar to what would happen if we tried a RET to a 
non-canonical address: the fetch fails and the JMP gets the #GP?

In that sense it's the fault of the return instruction.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-27 11:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-26 12:42 [PATCH] x86/asm/entry/64: better check for canonical address Denys Vlasenko
2015-03-26 18:45 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-03-27  8:57   ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-30 14:27   ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-03-30 14:30     ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-03-30 14:45       ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-03-27  8:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-27 10:45   ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-03-27 11:17     ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-27 11:28       ` Brian Gerst
2015-03-27 11:34         ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-27 12:14           ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-03-27 12:16             ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-27 12:31               ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-03-28  9:11                 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-29 19:36                   ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-03-29 21:12                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-03-29 21:46                       ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-03-31 16:43                     ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-31 17:08                       ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-03-31 17:31                         ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-03-27 11:27 ` Brian Gerst
2015-03-27 11:31   ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2015-03-27 21:37     ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-04-02 17:37 ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-04-02 18:10   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-04-21 16:27 Denys Vlasenko
2015-04-21 18:08 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-04-23 15:10   ` Borislav Petkov
2015-04-23 15:41     ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-04-23 15:49       ` Borislav Petkov
2015-04-23 15:52         ` Andy Lutomirski

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=20150327113125.GA14778@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
    --cc=dvlasenk@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --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).