From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@canonical.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/kvm: fix FASTOP_SIZE when return thunks are enabled
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 11:52:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Ys/ncSnSFEST4fgL@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220713171241.184026-1-cascardo@canonical.com>
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 02:12:41PM -0300, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
> The return thunk call makes the fastop functions larger, just like IBT
> does. Consider a 16-byte FASTOP_SIZE when CONFIG_RETHUNK is enabled.
>
> Otherwise, functions will be incorrectly aligned and when computing their
> position for differently sized operators, they will executed in the middle
> or end of a function, which may as well be an int3, leading to a crash
> like:
Bah.. I did the SETcc stuff, but then forgot about the FASTOP :/
af2e140f3420 ("x86/kvm: Fix SETcc emulation for return thunks")
> Fixes: aa3d480315ba ("x86: Use return-thunk in asm code")
> Signed-off-by: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@canonical.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> index db96bf7d1122..d779eea1052e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@
> #define X16(x...) X8(x), X8(x)
>
> #define NR_FASTOP (ilog2(sizeof(ulong)) + 1)
> -#define FASTOP_SIZE (8 * (1 + HAS_KERNEL_IBT))
> +#define FASTOP_SIZE (8 * (1 + (HAS_KERNEL_IBT | IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RETHUNK))))
Would it make sense to do something like this instead?
---
arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c | 10 ++++++----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
index db96bf7d1122..b4305d2dcc51 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
@@ -189,8 +189,12 @@
#define X8(x...) X4(x), X4(x)
#define X16(x...) X8(x), X8(x)
-#define NR_FASTOP (ilog2(sizeof(ulong)) + 1)
-#define FASTOP_SIZE (8 * (1 + HAS_KERNEL_IBT))
+#define NR_FASTOP (ilog2(sizeof(ulong)) + 1)
+#define RET_LENGTH (1 + (4 * IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RETHUNK)) + \
+ IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SLS))
+#define FASTOP_LENGTH (7 + ENDBR_INSN_SIZE + RET_LENGTH)
+#define FASTOP_SIZE (8 << ((FASTOP_LENGTH > 8) & 1) << ((FASTOP_LENGTH > 16) & 1))
+static_assert(FASTOP_LENGTH <= FASTOP_SIZE);
struct opcode {
u64 flags;
@@ -442,8 +446,6 @@ static int fastop(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, fastop_t fop);
* RET | JMP __x86_return_thunk [1,5 bytes; CONFIG_RETHUNK]
* INT3 [1 byte; CONFIG_SLS]
*/
-#define RET_LENGTH (1 + (4 * IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RETHUNK)) + \
- IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SLS))
#define SETCC_LENGTH (ENDBR_INSN_SIZE + 3 + RET_LENGTH)
#define SETCC_ALIGN (4 << ((SETCC_LENGTH > 4) & 1) << ((SETCC_LENGTH > 8) & 1))
static_assert(SETCC_LENGTH <= SETCC_ALIGN);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-14 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-13 17:12 [PATCH] x86/kvm: fix FASTOP_SIZE when return thunks are enabled Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo
2022-07-14 9:52 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-07-14 11:36 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-07-14 11:48 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-07-14 11:54 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-07-14 16:15 ` Naresh Kamboju
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=Ys/ncSnSFEST4fgL@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=cascardo@canonical.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkft@linaro.org \
--cc=naresh.kamboju@linaro.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox