linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
To: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Arnd Bergman <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>,
	Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@gmail.com>,
	Cristiano Giuffrida <c.giuffrida@vu.nl>,
	"Bos, H.J." <h.j.bos@vu.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/13] list: introduce speculative safe list_for_each_entry()
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 17:29:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAG48ez0m6V12dPVwZMQ9gi0ig7ELf_+KbLArE02SD5cYrZvH-w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220217184829.1991035-2-jakobkoschel@gmail.com>

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 7:48 PM Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@gmail.com> wrote:
> list_for_each_entry() selects either the correct value (pos) or a safe
> value for the additional mispredicted iteration (NULL) for the list
> iterator.
> list_for_each_entry() calls select_nospec(), which performs
> a branch-less select.
>
> On x86, this select is performed via a cmov. Otherwise, it's performed
> via various shift/mask/etc. operations.
>
> Kasper Acknowledgements: Jakob Koschel, Brian Johannesmeyer, Kaveh
> Razavi, Herbert Bos, Cristiano Giuffrida from the VUSec group at VU
> Amsterdam.
>
> Co-developed-by: Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@gmail.com>

Yeah, I think this is the best way to do this without deeply intrusive
changes to how lists are represented in memory.

Some notes on the specific implementation:

>  arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h | 12 ++++++++++++
>  include/linux/list.h           |  3 ++-
>  include/linux/nospec.h         | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
> index 35389b2af88e..722797ad74e2 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
> @@ -48,6 +48,18 @@ static inline unsigned long array_index_mask_nospec(unsigned long index,
>  /* Override the default implementation from linux/nospec.h. */
>  #define array_index_mask_nospec array_index_mask_nospec
>
> +/* Override the default implementation from linux/nospec.h. */
> +#define select_nospec(cond, exptrue, expfalse)                         \
> +({                                                                     \
> +       typeof(exptrue) _out = (exptrue);                               \
> +                                                                       \
> +       asm volatile("test %1, %1\n\t"                                  \

This shouldn't need "volatile", because it is only necessary if _out
is actually used. Using "volatile" here could prevent optimizing out
useless code. OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR() also doesn't use "volatile".

> +           "cmove %2, %0"                                              \
> +           : "+r" (_out)                                               \
> +           : "r" (cond), "r" (expfalse));                              \
> +       _out;                                                           \
> +})

I guess the idea is probably to also add code like this for other
important architectures, in particular arm64?


It might also be a good idea to rename the arch-overridable macro to
something like "arch_select_nospec" and then have a wrapper macro in
include/linux/nospec.h that takes care of type safety issues.

The current definition of the macro doesn't warn if you pass in
incompatible pointer types, like this:

int *bogus_pointer_mix(int cond, int *a, long *b) {
  return select_nospec(cond, a, b);
}

and if you pass in integers of different sizes, it may silently
truncate to the size of the smaller one - this C code:

long wrong_int_conversion(int cond, int a, long b) {
  return select_nospec(cond, a, b);
}

generates this assembly:

wrong_int_conversion:
  test %edi, %edi
  cmove %rdx, %esi
  movslq %esi, %rax
  ret

It might be a good idea to add something like a
static_assert(__same_type(...), ...) to protect against that.

>  /* Prevent speculative execution past this barrier. */
>  #define barrier_nospec() alternative("", "lfence", X86_FEATURE_LFENCE_RDTSC)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/list.h b/include/linux/list.h
> index dd6c2041d09c..1a1b39fdd122 100644
> --- a/include/linux/list.h
> +++ b/include/linux/list.h
> @@ -636,7 +636,8 @@ static inline void list_splice_tail_init(struct list_head *list,
>   */
>  #define list_for_each_entry(pos, head, member)                         \
>         for (pos = list_first_entry(head, typeof(*pos), member);        \
> -            !list_entry_is_head(pos, head, member);                    \
> +           ({ bool _cond = !list_entry_is_head(pos, head, member);     \
> +            pos = select_nospec(_cond, pos, NULL); _cond; }); \
>              pos = list_next_entry(pos, member))

I wonder if it'd look nicer to write it roughly like this:

#define NOSPEC_TYPE_CHECK(_guarded_var, _cond)                  \
({                                                              \
  bool __cond = (_cond);                                        \
  typeof(_guarded_var) *__guarded_var = &(_guarded_var);        \
  *__guarded_var = select_nospec(__cond, *__guarded_var, NULL); \
  __cond;                                                       \
})

#define list_for_each_entry(pos, head, member)                                \
        for (pos = list_first_entry(head, typeof(*pos), member);              \
             NOSPEC_TYPE_CHECK(head, !list_entry_is_head(pos, head, member)); \
             pos = list_next_entry(pos, member))

I think having a NOSPEC_TYPE_CHECK() like this makes it semantically
clearer, and easier to add in other places? But I don't know if the
others agree...

>  /**
> diff --git a/include/linux/nospec.h b/include/linux/nospec.h
> index c1e79f72cd89..ca8ed81e4f9e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/nospec.h
> +++ b/include/linux/nospec.h
> @@ -67,4 +67,20 @@ int arch_prctl_spec_ctrl_set(struct task_struct *task, unsigned long which,
>  /* Speculation control for seccomp enforced mitigation */
>  void arch_seccomp_spec_mitigate(struct task_struct *task);
>
> +/**
> + * select_nospec - select a value without using a branch; equivalent to:
> + * cond ? exptrue : expfalse;
> + */
> +#ifndef select_nospec
> +#define select_nospec(cond, exptrue, expfalse)                         \
> +({                                                                     \
> +       unsigned long _t = (unsigned long) (exptrue);                   \
> +       unsigned long _f = (unsigned long) (expfalse);                  \
> +       unsigned long _c = (unsigned long) (cond);                      \
> +       OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR(_c);                                         \
> +       unsigned long _m = -((_c | -_c) >> (BITS_PER_LONG - 1));        \
> +       (typeof(exptrue)) ((_t & _m) | (_f & ~_m));                     \
> +})
> +#endif

(As a sidenote, it might be easier to implement a conditional zeroing
primitive than a generic conditional select primitive if that's all
you need, something like:

#define cond_nullptr_nospec(_cond, _exp)          \
({                                             \
  unsigned long __exp = (unsigned long)(_exp); \
  unsigned long _mask = 0UL - !(_cond);       \
  OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR(_mask);                   \
  (typeof(_exp)) (_mask & __exp);              \
})

)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-02-18 16:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-17 18:48 [RFC PATCH 00/13] Proposal for speculative safe list iterator Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 01/13] list: introduce speculative safe list_for_each_entry() Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 19:29   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-02-18 16:29     ` Jann Horn
2022-02-18 16:29   ` Jann Horn [this message]
2022-02-23 14:32     ` Jakob
2022-02-19 19:44   ` Jann Horn
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 02/13] scripts: coccinelle: adapt to find list_for_each_entry nospec issues Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 03/13] usb: remove the usage of the list iterator after the loop Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 19:28   ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23 14:13     ` Jakob
2022-02-23 14:16       ` Jakob
2022-02-24 10:33         ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-02-24 17:56           ` Linus Torvalds
     [not found]         ` <6d191223d93249a98511177d4af08420@pexch012b.vu.local>
2022-02-24 10:46           ` Cristiano Giuffrida
2022-02-24 11:26             ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-02-23 18:47       ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23 19:23         ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23 19:43           ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23 20:24           ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-23 20:43             ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23 20:48               ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-23 21:53                 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-24 16:04                   ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-02-23 20:54               ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23 22:21                 ` David Laight
2022-02-25 21:36                 ` Uecker, Martin
2022-02-25 22:02                   ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-26  1:21                     ` Martin Uecker
2022-02-27 18:12                       ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-02-28  7:08                         ` Martin Uecker
2022-02-28 13:49                           ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-03-01 20:26                             ` Linus Torvalds
2022-03-02  7:27                               ` Martin Uecker
2022-02-26 12:42           ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-02-26 22:14             ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-26 23:03               ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-27  1:19                 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-02-27  1:09               ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-02-27  7:10                 ` David Laight
2022-02-27 11:32                   ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-02-27 18:09                     ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-02-27 20:17                       ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-02-27 21:04                         ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-28  6:15                           ` David Laight
2022-02-27 22:43                         ` Miguel Ojeda
2022-02-27 21:28                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-02-27 22:43                   ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 04/13] vfio/mdev: " Jakob Koschel
2022-02-18 15:12   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-02-23 14:18     ` Jakob
2022-02-23 19:06       ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23 19:12         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-02-23 19:31           ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23 20:15             ` Jakob
2022-02-23 20:22               ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-23 22:08                 ` Jakob
2022-02-23 20:19             ` Rasmus Villemoes
2022-02-23 20:34               ` Linus Torvalds
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 05/13] drivers/perf: " Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 06/13] ARM: mmp: " Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 07/13] udp_tunnel: " Jakob Koschel
2022-02-23 20:00   ` Christophe JAILLET
2022-02-24  6:20     ` Dan Carpenter
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 08/13] net: dsa: future proof usage of " Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 09/13] drbd: " Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 10/13] powerpc/spufs: " Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 11/13] ath6kl: remove use " Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 12/13] staging: greybus: audio: Remove usage " Jakob Koschel
2022-02-17 18:48 ` [RFC PATCH 13/13] scsi: mpt3sas: comment about invalid usage of the list iterator Jakob Koschel

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=CAG48ez0m6V12dPVwZMQ9gi0ig7ELf_+KbLArE02SD5cYrZvH-w@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bjohannesmeyer@gmail.com \
    --cc=c.giuffrida@vu.nl \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=gustavo@embeddedor.com \
    --cc=h.j.bos@vu.nl \
    --cc=jakobkoschel@gmail.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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).