From: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@redhat.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] ELF: Add ELF program property parsing support
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 15:29:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <59052137a61bab9e8d312d51644aade3953ba339.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190902092816.GK27757@arm.com>
On Mon, 2019-09-02 at 10:28 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 06:03:27PM +0100, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> > On Fri, 2019-08-30 at 09:34 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 06:37:45AM +0100, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 06:23:40PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > > > ELF program properties will needed for detecting whether to enable
> > > > > optional architecture or ABI features for a new ELF process.
> > > > >
> > > > > For now, there are no generic properties that we care about, so do
> > > > > nothing unless CONFIG_ARCH_USE_GNU_PROPERTY=y.
> > > > >
> > > > > Otherwise, the presence of properties using the PT_PROGRAM_PROPERTY
> > > > > phdrs entry (if any), and notify each property to the arch code.
> > > > >
> > > > > For now, the added code is not used.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> > >
> > > Thanks for the review.
> > >
> > > Do you have any thoughts on Yu-Cheng Yu's comments? It would be nice to
> > > early-terminate the scan if we can, but my feeling so far was that the
> > > scan is cheap, the number of properties is unlikely to be more than a
> > > smallish integer, and the code separation benefits of just calling the
> > > arch code for every property probably likely outweigh the costs of
> > > having to iterate over every property. We could always optimise it
> > > later if necessary.
> > >
> > > I need to double-check that there's no way we can get stuck in an
> > > infinite loop with the current code, though I've not seen it in my
> > > testing. I should throw some malformed notes at it though.
> >
> > Here is my arch_parse_elf_property() and objdump of the property.
> > The parser works fine.
>
> [...]
>
> > int arch_parse_elf_property(u32 type, const void *data, size_t datasz,
> >
> > bool compat, struct arch_elf_state *state)
> > {
> > if (type
> > != GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_1_AND)
> > return -ENOENT;
>
> For error returns, I was following this convention:
>
> EIO: invalid ELF file
>
> ENOEXEC: valid ELF file, but we can't (or won't) support it
>
> 0: OK, or don't care
From errno-base.h, EIO is for I/O error; ENOEXEC is for Exec format error.
Is this closer to what is happening?
>
> This function gets called for every property, including properties that
> the arch code may not be interested in, so for properties you don't care
> about here you should return 0.
Yes.
>
> >
> > if (datasz < sizeof(unsigned int))
> > return -ENOEXEC;
>
> Should this be != ?
>
> According to the draft x86-64 psABI spec [1],
> X86_PROPERTY_FEATURE_1_AND (and all properties based on
> GNU_PROPERTY_X86_UINT32_AND_LO) has data consisting of a single 4-byte
> unsigned integer.
>
> > state->gnu_property = *(unsigned int *)data;
> > return 0;
> > }
Yes, I will change it.
Thanks,
Yu-cheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-03 22:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-23 17:23 [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] ELF: Alternate program property parser Dave Martin
2019-08-23 17:23 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/2] ELF: UAPI and Kconfig additions for ELF program properties Dave Martin
2019-08-23 17:23 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] ELF: Add ELF program property parsing support Dave Martin
2019-08-30 5:37 ` Kees Cook
2019-08-30 8:34 ` Dave Martin
2019-08-30 17:03 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2019-09-02 9:28 ` Dave Martin
2019-09-03 22:29 ` Yu-cheng Yu [this message]
2019-09-04 11:05 ` Dave Martin
2019-09-04 16:50 ` Kees Cook
2019-09-05 7:57 ` Dave Martin
2019-10-09 12:59 ` Dave Martin
2019-10-10 21:00 ` Kees Cook
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=59052137a61bab9e8d312d51644aade3953ba339.camel@intel.com \
--to=yu-cheng.yu@intel.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=esyr@redhat.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).