From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
"Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
"H. J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
"Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/6] x86/signal: Detect and prevent an alternate signal stack overflow
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 21:56:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXQZuvJQrHDMst6PPgtJxaS_sPk2JhwMiMDNPunq45YFg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210325185435.GB32296@zn.tnic>
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 11:54 AM Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 11:13:12AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
> > index ea794a083c44..53781324a2d3 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
> > @@ -237,7 +237,8 @@ get_sigframe(struct k_sigaction *ka, struct pt_regs *regs, size_t frame_size,
> > unsigned long math_size = 0;
> > unsigned long sp = regs->sp;
> > unsigned long buf_fx = 0;
> > - int onsigstack = on_sig_stack(sp);
> > + bool already_onsigstack = on_sig_stack(sp);
> > + bool entering_altstack = false;
> > int ret;
> >
> > /* redzone */
> > @@ -246,15 +247,25 @@ get_sigframe(struct k_sigaction *ka, struct pt_regs *regs, size_t frame_size,
> >
> > /* This is the X/Open sanctioned signal stack switching. */
> > if (ka->sa.sa_flags & SA_ONSTACK) {
> > - if (sas_ss_flags(sp) == 0)
> > + /*
> > + * This checks already_onsigstack via sas_ss_flags().
> > + * Sensible programs use SS_AUTODISARM, which disables
> > + * that check, and programs that don't use
> > + * SS_AUTODISARM get compatible but potentially
> > + * bizarre behavior.
> > + */
> > + if (sas_ss_flags(sp) == 0) {
> > sp = current->sas_ss_sp + current->sas_ss_size;
> > + entering_altstack = true;
> > + }
> > } else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32) &&
> > - !onsigstack &&
> > + !already_onsigstack &&
> > regs->ss != __USER_DS &&
> > !(ka->sa.sa_flags & SA_RESTORER) &&
> > ka->sa.sa_restorer) {
> > /* This is the legacy signal stack switching. */
> > sp = (unsigned long) ka->sa.sa_restorer;
> > + entering_altstack = true;
> > }
>
> What a mess this whole signal handling is. I need a course in signal
> handling to understand what's going on here...
>
> >
> > sp = fpu__alloc_mathframe(sp, IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32),
> > @@ -267,8 +278,16 @@ get_sigframe(struct k_sigaction *ka, struct pt_regs *regs, size_t frame_size,
> > * If we are on the alternate signal stack and would overflow it, don't.
> > * Return an always-bogus address instead so we will die with SIGSEGV.
> > */
> > - if (onsigstack && !likely(on_sig_stack(sp)))
> > + if (unlikely(entering_altstack &&
> > + (sp <= current->sas_ss_sp ||
> > + sp - current->sas_ss_sp > current->sas_ss_size))) {
>
> You could've simply done
>
> if (unlikely(entering_altstack && !on_sig_stack(sp)))
>
> here.
Nope. on_sig_stack() is a horrible kludge and won't work here. We
could have something like __on_sig_stack() or sp_is_on_sig_stack() or
something, though.
>
>
> > + if (show_unhandled_signals && printk_ratelimit()) {
> > + pr_info("%s[%d] overflowed sigaltstack",
> > + tsk->comm, task_pid_nr(tsk));
> > + }
>
> Why do you even wanna issue that? It looks like callers will propagate
> an error value up and people don't look at dmesg all the time.
I figure that the people whose programs spontaneously crash should get
a hint why if they look at dmesg. Maybe the message should say
"overflowed sigaltstack -- try noavx512"?
We really ought to have a SIGSIGFAIL signal that's sent, double-fault
style, when we fail to send a signal.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-26 4:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-16 6:52 [PATCH v7 0/6] x86: Improve Minimum Alternate Stack Size Chang S. Bae
2021-03-16 6:52 ` [PATCH v7 1/6] uapi: Define the aux vector AT_MINSIGSTKSZ Chang S. Bae
2021-03-16 6:52 ` [PATCH v7 2/6] x86/signal: Introduce helpers to get the maximum signal frame size Chang S. Bae
2021-03-16 6:52 ` [PATCH v7 3/6] x86/elf: Support a new ELF aux vector AT_MINSIGSTKSZ Chang S. Bae
2021-03-16 6:52 ` [PATCH v7 4/6] selftest/sigaltstack: Use the AT_MINSIGSTKSZ aux vector if available Chang S. Bae
2021-03-16 6:52 ` [PATCH v7 5/6] x86/signal: Detect and prevent an alternate signal stack overflow Chang S. Bae
2021-03-16 11:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-03-16 18:26 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-03-25 16:20 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-03-25 17:21 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-03-25 20:14 ` Florian Weimer
2021-03-25 18:13 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-25 18:54 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-03-25 21:11 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-03-25 21:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-03-26 4:56 ` Andy Lutomirski [this message]
2021-03-26 10:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-04-12 22:30 ` Bae, Chang Seok
2021-04-14 10:12 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-04-14 11:30 ` Florian Weimer
2021-04-14 12:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-05-03 5:30 ` Florian Weimer
2021-05-03 11:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-03-26 4:58 ` Andy Lutomirski
2021-03-16 6:52 ` [PATCH v7 6/6] selftest/x86/signal: Include test cases for validating sigaltstack Chang S. Bae
2021-03-17 10:06 ` [PATCH v7 0/6] x86: Improve Minimum Alternate Stack Size Ingo Molnar
2021-03-17 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2021-03-19 18:12 ` Len Brown
2021-03-20 17:32 ` Ingo Molnar
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=CALCETrXQZuvJQrHDMst6PPgtJxaS_sPk2JhwMiMDNPunq45YFg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=carlos@redhat.com \
--cc=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--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).