From: Mohammed Gamal <m.gamal005@gmail.com>
To: avi@redhat.com
Cc: mtosatti@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Mohammed Gamal <m.gamal005@gmail.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] x86 emulator: Add segment limit checks and helper functions
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 17:10:36 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1278598236-12103-4-git-send-email-m.gamal005@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1278598236-12103-1-git-send-email-m.gamal005@gmail.com>
This patch adds segment limit checks to the x86 emulator, in addition to some
helper functions and changes to the return values of emulate_push to accomodate
the new checks.
----
Changes from v1:
- Added seg_override_limit() and emulate_ss() helpers
- Corrected limit check return values for long mode
- Limit Checking is now consistent with the Intel documentation
Signed-off-by: Mohammed Gamal <m.gamal005@gmail.com>
---
arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c | 135 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 files changed, 113 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
index 6bb7c68..f415d4b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
@@ -633,6 +633,15 @@ static unsigned long seg_base(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
return ops->get_cached_segment_base(seg, ctxt->vcpu);
}
+static u32 seg_limit(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+ struct x86_emulate_ops *ops, int seg)
+{
+ if (ctxt->mode == X86EMUL_MODE_PROT64)
+ return -1;
+
+ return ops->get_cached_segment_limit(seg, ctxt->vcpu);
+}
+
static unsigned long seg_override_base(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
struct x86_emulate_ops *ops,
struct decode_cache *c)
@@ -643,6 +652,16 @@ static unsigned long seg_override_base(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
return seg_base(ctxt, ops, c->seg_override);
}
+static u32 seg_override_limit(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+ struct x86_emulate_ops *ops,
+ struct decode_cache *c)
+{
+ if (!c->has_seg_override)
+ return -1;
+
+ return seg_limit(ctxt, ops, c->seg_override);
+}
+
static unsigned long cs_base(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
struct x86_emulate_ops *ops)
{
@@ -661,6 +680,24 @@ static unsigned long ss_base(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
return seg_base(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_SS);
}
+static u32 cs_limit(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+ struct x86_emulate_ops *ops)
+{
+ return seg_limit(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_CS);
+}
+
+static u32 es_limit(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+ struct x86_emulate_ops *ops)
+{
+ return seg_limit(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_ES);
+}
+
+static u32 ss_limit(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+ struct x86_emulate_ops *ops)
+{
+ return seg_limit(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_SS);
+}
+
static void emulate_exception(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, int vec,
u32 error, bool valid)
{
@@ -675,6 +712,11 @@ static void emulate_gp(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, int err)
emulate_exception(ctxt, GP_VECTOR, err, true);
}
+static void emulate_ss(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, int err)
+{
+ emulate_exception(ctxt, SS_VECTOR, err, true);
+}
+
static void emulate_pf(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, unsigned long addr,
int err)
{
@@ -719,6 +761,12 @@ static int do_insn_fetch(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
{
int rc;
+ /* eip is already relative to CS, so we just check it against the limit */
+ if (eip > cs_limit(ctxt, ops) - size - 1) {
+ emulate_gp(ctxt, 0);
+ return X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT;
+ }
+
/* x86 instructions are limited to 15 bytes. */
if (eip + size - ctxt->eip > 15)
return X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE;
@@ -1222,6 +1270,11 @@ done_prefixes:
c->src.ptr = (unsigned long *)
register_address(c, seg_override_base(ctxt, ops, c),
c->regs[VCPU_REGS_RSI]);
+ if ((unsigned long)c->src.ptr - seg_override_base(ctxt, ops, c) >
+ seg_override_limit(ctxt, ops, c) - c->src.bytes - 1) {
+ emulate_gp(ctxt, 0);
+ return X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT;
+ }
c->src.val = 0;
break;
case SrcImmFAddr:
@@ -1318,6 +1371,12 @@ done_prefixes:
c->dst.ptr = (unsigned long *)
register_address(c, es_base(ctxt, ops),
c->regs[VCPU_REGS_RDI]);
+
+ if ((unsigned long)c->dst.ptr - es_base(ctxt, ops) >
+ es_limit(ctxt, ops) - c->dst.bytes - 1) {
+ emulate_gp(ctxt, 0);
+ return X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT;
+ }
c->dst.val = 0;
break;
}
@@ -1637,7 +1696,7 @@ static inline int writeback(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
}
-static inline void emulate_push(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+static inline int emulate_push(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
struct x86_emulate_ops *ops)
{
struct decode_cache *c = &ctxt->decode;
@@ -1648,6 +1707,13 @@ static inline void emulate_push(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
register_address_increment(c, &c->regs[VCPU_REGS_RSP], -c->op_bytes);
c->dst.ptr = (void *) register_address(c, ss_base(ctxt, ops),
c->regs[VCPU_REGS_RSP]);
+ if ((unsigned long) c->dst.ptr - ss_base(ctxt, ops) >
+ ss_limit(ctxt, ops) - c->dst.bytes - 1) {
+ emulate_ss(ctxt, 0);
+ return X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT;
+ }
+
+ return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
}
static int emulate_pop(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
@@ -1655,11 +1721,15 @@ static int emulate_pop(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
void *dest, int len)
{
struct decode_cache *c = &ctxt->decode;
+ unsigned long reg_addr = register_address(c, ss_base(ctxt, ops), c->regs[VCPU_REGS_RSP]);
int rc;
- rc = read_emulated(ctxt, ops, register_address(c, ss_base(ctxt, ops),
- c->regs[VCPU_REGS_RSP]),
- dest, len);
+ if (reg_addr - ss_base(ctxt, ops) > ss_limit(ctxt, ops) - c->src.bytes - 1) {
+ emulate_ss(ctxt, 0);
+ return X86EMUL_PROPAGATE_FAULT;
+ }
+
+ rc = read_emulated(ctxt, ops, reg_addr, dest, len);
if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
return rc;
@@ -1710,14 +1780,14 @@ static int emulate_popf(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
return rc;
}
-static void emulate_push_sreg(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+static int emulate_push_sreg(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
struct x86_emulate_ops *ops, int seg)
{
struct decode_cache *c = &ctxt->decode;
c->src.val = ops->get_segment_selector(seg, ctxt->vcpu);
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ return emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
}
static int emulate_pop_sreg(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
@@ -1747,7 +1817,10 @@ static int emulate_pusha(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
(reg == VCPU_REGS_RSP) ?
(c->src.val = old_esp) : (c->src.val = c->regs[reg]);
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ return rc;
rc = writeback(ctxt, ops);
if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
@@ -1859,15 +1932,13 @@ static inline int emulate_grp45(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
old_eip = c->eip;
c->eip = c->src.val;
c->src.val = old_eip;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
- break;
+ return emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
}
case 4: /* jmp abs */
c->eip = c->src.val;
break;
case 6: /* push */
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
- break;
+ return emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
}
return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
}
@@ -2523,7 +2594,7 @@ static int emulator_do_task_switch(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
c->op_bytes = c->ad_bytes = (next_tss_desc.type & 8) ? 4 : 2;
c->lock_prefix = 0;
c->src.val = (unsigned long) error_code;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ ret = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
}
return ret;
@@ -2656,7 +2727,9 @@ special_insn:
emulate_2op_SrcV("add", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x06: /* push es */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_ES);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_ES);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
case 0x07: /* pop es */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_ES);
@@ -2668,14 +2741,18 @@ special_insn:
emulate_2op_SrcV("or", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x0e: /* push cs */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_CS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_CS);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
case 0x10 ... 0x15:
adc: /* adc */
emulate_2op_SrcV("adc", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x16: /* push ss */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_SS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_SS);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
case 0x17: /* pop ss */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_SS);
@@ -2687,7 +2764,9 @@ special_insn:
emulate_2op_SrcV("sbb", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x1e: /* push ds */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_DS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_DS);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
case 0x1f: /* pop ds */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_DS);
@@ -2717,7 +2796,9 @@ special_insn:
emulate_1op("dec", c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x50 ... 0x57: /* push reg */
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
case 0x58 ... 0x5f: /* pop reg */
pop_instruction:
@@ -2742,7 +2823,9 @@ special_insn:
break;
case 0x68: /* push imm */
case 0x6a: /* push imm8 */
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
case 0x6c: /* insb */
case 0x6d: /* insw/insd */
@@ -2870,7 +2953,9 @@ special_insn:
goto xchg;
case 0x9c: /* pushf */
c->src.val = (unsigned long) ctxt->eflags;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
case 0x9d: /* popf */
c->dst.type = OP_REG;
@@ -2934,7 +3019,9 @@ special_insn:
long int rel = c->src.val;
c->src.val = (unsigned long) c->eip;
jmp_rel(c, rel);
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
}
case 0xe9: /* jmp rel */
@@ -3261,7 +3348,9 @@ twobyte_insn:
c->dst.type = OP_NONE;
break;
case 0xa0: /* push fs */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_FS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_FS);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
case 0xa1: /* pop fs */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_FS);
@@ -3280,7 +3369,9 @@ twobyte_insn:
emulate_2op_cl("shld", c->src2, c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0xa8: /* push gs */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_GS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_GS);
+ if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ goto done;
break;
case 0xa9: /* pop gs */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_GS);
--
1.7.0.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-08 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-08 14:10 [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add segment limit checks to emulator Mohammed Gamal
2010-07-08 14:10 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] Add helper methods to get segment limits Mohammed Gamal
2010-07-08 14:10 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/3] x86 emulator: Add cs_base() helper Mohammed Gamal
2010-07-08 14:10 ` Mohammed Gamal [this message]
2010-07-11 18:07 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] x86 emulator: Add segment limit checks and helper functions Avi Kivity
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=1278598236-12103-4-git-send-email-m.gamal005@gmail.com \
--to=m.gamal005@gmail.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
/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).