Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: verify xstate buffer size according with requested features

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Thu, Jan 18 2024 at 14:02, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 1/18/24 11:54, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 18 2024 at 10:27, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> If we have nice, reliable fault handling and then decide that we've got
>>> XRSTOR's running amok reading random memory all over the place that need
>>> a nicer error message, then we can add that code to predict the future.
>>> If our "predict the future" code goes wrong, then we lose an error
>>> message -- not a big deal.
>> After staring more at it, it's arguable to pass fpstate->user_size to
>> fault_in_readable() and ignore fx_sw->xstate_size completely.
>> 
>> That's a guaranteed to be reliable size which prevents endless loops
>> because arguably that's the maximum size which can be touched by XRSTOR,
>> no?
>
> I like it.  It takes fx_sw completely out of the picture, which was the
> root of the problem in the first place.

Correct.

I really don't care about the esoteric case where this might
theoretically result in a unjustified application abort.

You really need to twist your brain around 6 corners and then squint
twice to construct that case. Of course syzcaller might trigger it, but
fuzzing the sigreturn frame is a #GP, #PF and whatever lottery anyway.