From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: suppress KMSAN reports in arch_within_stack_frames()
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:22:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y3tRgGUKCxUoLeM8@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221118172305.3321253-1-glider@google.com>
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 06:23:05PM +0100, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> arch_within_stack_frames() performs stack walking and may confuse
> KMSAN by stepping on stale shadow values. To prevent false positive
> reports, disable KMSAN checks in this function.
>
> This fixes KMSAN's interoperability with CONFIG_HARDENED_USERCOPY.
>
> Link: https://github.com/google/kmsan/issues/89
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y3b9AAEKp2Vr3e6O@sol.localdomain/
> Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> index f0cb881c1d690..f1cccba52eb97 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> @@ -163,7 +163,12 @@ struct thread_info {
> * GOOD_FRAME if within a frame
> * BAD_STACK if placed across a frame boundary (or outside stack)
> * NOT_STACK unable to determine (no frame pointers, etc)
> + *
> + * This function reads pointers from the stack and dereferences them. The
> + * pointers may not have their KMSAN shadow set up properly, which may result
> + * in false positive reports. Disable instrumentation to avoid those.
> */
> +__no_kmsan_checks
> static inline int arch_within_stack_frames(const void * const stack,
> const void * const stackend,
> const void *obj, unsigned long len)
Seems OK; but now I'm confused as to the exact distinction between
__no_sanitize_memory and __no_kmsan_checks.
The comments there about seem to suggest __no_sanitize_memory ensures no
instrumentation at all, and __no_kmsan_checks some instrumentation but
doesn't actually check anything -- so what's left then?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-21 10:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-18 17:23 [PATCH] x86: suppress KMSAN reports in arch_within_stack_frames() Alexander Potapenko
2022-11-21 10:22 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-11-21 10:28 ` Alexander Potapenko
2022-11-21 11:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-11-21 14:27 ` Alexander Potapenko
2022-11-22 8:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-11-30 5:40 ` Eric Biggers
2023-01-12 5:40 ` Eric Biggers
2023-01-27 16:12 ` Eric Biggers
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=Y3tRgGUKCxUoLeM8@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--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.