linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>
To: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Dmitry Golovin <dima@golovin.in>,
	clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] x86/boot: Check that there are no runtime relocations
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:13:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200526171340.pdbautbix5ygdvgp@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200526151623.GB2190602@rani.riverdale.lan>


On 2020-05-26, Arvind Sankar wrote:
>On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 08:11:56AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 00:59, Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> >  # Compressed kernel should be built as PIE since it may be loaded at any
>> >  # address by the bootloader.
>> > -KBUILD_LDFLAGS += $(call ld-option, -pie) $(call ld-option, --no-dynamic-linker)
>> > +KBUILD_LDFLAGS += -pie $(call ld-option, --no-dynamic-linker)
>>
>> Do we still need -pie linking with these changes applied?
>>
>
>I think it's currently not strictly necessary -- eg the 64bit kernel
>doesn't get linked as pie right now with LLD or old binutils. However,
>it is safer to do so to ensure that the result remains PIC with future
>versions of the linker. There are linker optimizations that can convert
>certain PIC instructions when PIE is disabled. While I think they
>currently all focus on eliminating indirection through the GOT (and thus
>wouldn't be applicable any more),

There are 3 forms described by x86-64 psABI B.2 Optimize GOTPCRELX Relocations

(1) movq foo@GOTPCREL(%rip), %reg -> leaq foo(%rip), %reg
(2) call *foo@GOTPCREL(%rip) -> nop; call foo
(3) jmp *foo@GOTPCREL(%rip) -> jmp foo; nop

ld.bfd and gold perform (1) even for R_X86_64_GOTPCREL. LLD requires R_X86_64_[REX_]GOTPCRELX

>it's easy to imagine that they could
>get extended to, for eg, convert
>	leaq	foo(%rip), %rax
>to
>	movl	$foo, %eax
>with some nop padding, etc.

Not with NOP padding, but probably with instruction prefixes. It is
unclear the rewriting will be beneficial. Rewriting instructions definitely requires a
dedicated relocation type like R_X86_64_[REX_]GOTPCRELX.

>Also, the relocation check that's being added here would only work with
>PIE linking.

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-26 17:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-01  8:42 [PATCH] x86/boot: allow a relocatable kernel to be linked with lld Dmitry Golovin
2020-05-02  3:43 ` Nathan Chancellor
2020-05-15 18:50 ` Borislav Petkov
     [not found]   ` <602331589572661@mail.yandex.ru>
2020-05-17 19:44     ` Fangrui Song
2020-05-17 20:25       ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-18 19:10         ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-05-24 21:28           ` [PATCH 0/4] x86/boot: Remove runtime relocations from compressed kernel Arvind Sankar
2020-05-25  7:10             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-05-25 22:59             ` [PATCH v2 " Arvind Sankar
2020-05-26 12:29               ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-26 12:30                 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-05-26 12:33                   ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-26 12:44                     ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-26 14:47                       ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-26 14:50                         ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-26 15:36                           ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-26 15:38                             ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-27  6:26                             ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-26 14:48                       ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-26 14:55                         ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-26 15:07                           ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-26 15:31                             ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-27  6:24                               ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-26 16:18                             ` Sedat Dilek
2020-05-25 22:59             ` [PATCH v2 1/4] x86/boot: Add .text.* to setup.ld Arvind Sankar
2020-05-25 22:59             ` [PATCH v2 2/4] x86/boot: Remove run-time relocations from .head.text code Arvind Sankar
2020-05-25 22:59             ` [PATCH v2 3/4] x86/boot: Remove runtime relocations from head_{32,64}.S Arvind Sankar
2020-05-25 22:59             ` [PATCH v2 4/4] x86/boot: Check that there are no runtime relocations Arvind Sankar
2020-05-26  6:11               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-05-26 15:16                 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-26 17:13                   ` Fangrui Song [this message]
2020-05-26 19:14                     ` Arvind Sankar
2020-08-06 11:19                       ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-08-06 16:12                         ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-26  0:37             ` [PATCH 0/4] x86/boot: Remove runtime relocations from compressed kernel Fangrui Song
2020-05-24 21:28           ` [PATCH 1/4] x86/boot: Add .text.startup to setup.ld Arvind Sankar
2020-05-24 22:13             ` Fangrui Song
2020-05-24 23:00               ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-24 23:49                 ` Fangrui Song
2020-05-24 22:48             ` Brian Gerst
2020-05-24 21:28           ` [PATCH 2/4] x86/boot: Remove runtime relocations from .head.text code Arvind Sankar
2020-05-24 22:53             ` Fangrui Song
2020-05-24 23:44               ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-25  0:55                 ` Fangrui Song
2020-05-24 21:28           ` [PATCH 3/4] x86/boot: Remove runtime relocations from head_{32,64}.S Arvind Sankar
2020-05-24 23:22             ` Fangrui Song
2020-05-24 23:58               ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-24 21:28           ` [PATCH 4/4] x86/boot: Check that there are no runtime relocations Arvind Sankar
2020-05-24 23:36             ` Fangrui Song
2020-05-24 23:57               ` Arvind Sankar
2020-05-25  6:10             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-05-25 16:26               ` Fangrui Song
2020-05-25 19:22                 ` Arvind Sankar

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=20200526171340.pdbautbix5ygdvgp@google.com \
    --to=maskray@google.com \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=daniel.kiper@oracle.com \
    --cc=dima@golovin.in \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=nivedita@alum.mit.edu \
    --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).