From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Address fixups in arch/x86/entry/vdso/vma.c
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:02:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878qkhtd72.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5a2667c8-bad4-4079-90a2-e387b4472164@zytor.com>
On Thu, Jul 17 2025 at 10:34, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> One of the thing that my mind flagged was this:
>
> static void vdso_fix_landing(const struct vdso_image *image,
> struct vm_area_struct *new_vma)
> {
> if (in_ia32_syscall() && image == &vdso_image_32) {
> struct pt_regs *regs = current_pt_regs();
> unsigned long vdso_land = image->sym_int80_landing_pad;
> unsigned long old_land_addr = vdso_land +
> (unsigned long)current->mm->context.vdso;
>
> /* Fixing userspace landing - look at do_fast_syscall_32 */
> if (regs->ip == old_land_addr)
> regs->ip = new_vma->vm_start + vdso_land;
> }
> }
>
> static int vdso_mremap(const struct vm_special_mapping *sm,
> struct vm_area_struct *new_vma)
> {
> const struct vdso_image *image =
> current->mm->context.vdso_image;
>
> vdso_fix_landing(image, new_vma);
> current->mm->context.vdso = (void __user *)new_vma->vm_start;
>
> return 0;
> }
>
>
> --- ---
>
> This feels *way* more complicated than it should need to be. It seems
> to me that if the ip is inside the vdso at all, it would need to be
> adjusted, regardless of if it in an ia32 system call or not, and if it
> is at the specific landing spot or not.
In practice the only situation where ret->ip can be inside the VDSO is
when the remap syscall was invoked as IA32 syscall and the VDSO image is
a 32-bit image. So this check is pretty much paranoia.
> It is possible that it doesn't *matter*, but that's not really a good
> reason to make the code more complex.
>
> I came up with the following version as an alternative; I would be
> interesting to hear what you think.
>
> (Also, (unsigned long)current->mm->context.vdso occurs *all over the
> place*, but there is also a macro defined for it (VDSO_CURRENT_BASE, in
> <asm/elf.h>. My personal preference would be to replace both with an
> inline function.)
No objections, but in a seperate patch.
> If you don't think I'm missing something, I would like to do something
> like this:
>
>
> static inline void
> vdso_fix_address(unsigned long *ptr, const struct vdso_image *image,
> unsigned long from, unsigned long to)
> {
> if (!image) /* For potential uses elsewhere */
Aside of tail comments being horrible, this comment is just useless
gunk.
> return;
>
> unsigned long offset = *ptr - from;
Why on earth do you need to hand in the pt_regs->ip pointer instead of
using pt_regs->ip here at the usage side? Just to make the code even
less understandable than the original one?
> if (offset < image->size)
> *ptr = offset + to;
> }
>
> static int vdso_mremap(const struct vm_special_mapping *sm,
> struct vm_area_struct *new_vma)
> {
> vdso_fix_address(¤t_pt_regs()->ip,
> current->mm->context.vdso_image,
> vdso_current_base(),
> new_vma->vm_start);
TBH, this is incomprehensible garbage. If you want to simplify the whole
thing, then why not doing the obvious:
static int vdso_mremap(const struct vm_special_mapping *sm, struct vm_area_struct *new_vma)
{
const struct vdso_image *image = current->mm->context.vdso_image;
if (image) {
struct pt_regs *regs = current_pt_regs();
unsigned long offset = regs->ip - vdso_current_base();
/* Add a useful comment */
if (offset < image->size)
regs->ip = new_vma->vm_start + offset;
}
current->mm->context.vdso = (void __user *)new_vma->vm_start;
}
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-21 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-17 17:34 Address fixups in arch/x86/entry/vdso/vma.c H. Peter Anvin
2025-07-21 22:02 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2025-07-21 22:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=878qkhtd72.ffs@tglx \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.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 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.