All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
	x86@kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86, stackvalidate: Compile-time stack frame pointer validation
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:08:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150428140842.GC23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150428140454.GA17315@treble.redhat.com>

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:04:54AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 02:16:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 08:56:27AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > Frame pointer based stack traces aren't always reliable.  One big reason
> > > is that most asm functions don't set up the frame pointer.
> > > 
> > > Fix that by enforcing that all asm functions honor CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER.
> > > This is done with a new stackvalidate host tool which is automatically
> > > run for every compiled .S file and which validates that every asm
> > > function does the proper frame pointer setup.
> > 
> > Would it make sense (maybe as an additional CONFIG_*_DEBUG thing) to
> > also process the output of GCC with this tool? To both double check GCC
> > and to give the tool more input?
> 
> I tried that, but I discovered that gcc's usage of frame pointers would
> be a lot harder to validate.  It only sets up the frame pointer in code
> paths which have call instructions.  There are a lot of functions which
> have conditional jumps at the beginning which can jump straight to a
> return instruction without first doing the frame pointer setup.

Hmm, would not such code break your patching?

  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-28 14:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-27 13:56 [PATCH 0/2] Compile-time stack frame pointer validation Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-27 13:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86, stackvalidate: " Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-28 12:16   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-28 14:04     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-28 14:08       ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-04-28 14:21         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-28 14:26           ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-28 16:44   ` Petr Mladek
2015-04-28 17:54     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-27 13:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86, stackvalidate: Add asm frame pointer setup macros Josh Poimboeuf

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=20150428140842.GC23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mmarek@suse.cz \
    --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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.