From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
alyssa.milburn@linux.intel.com, keescook@chromium.org,
jpoimboe@kernel.org, joao@overdrivepizza.com,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: Rewrite ret_from_fork() in C
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 15:29:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230622132904.GR4253@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230622120750.5549-3-brgerst@gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 08:07:50AM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
> When kCFI is enabled, special handling is needed for the indirect call
> to the kernel thread function. Rewrite the ret_from_fork() function in
> C so that the compiler can properly handle the indirect call.
>
> Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
This is much nicer indeed. I'll take these patches into my series and
repost later today if you don't mind.
One little niggle below..
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S
> index f31e286c2977..5ee32e7e29e8 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S
> +++ b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S
> @@ -284,36 +284,21 @@ SYM_FUNC_END(__switch_to_asm)
> * r12: kernel thread arg
> */
> .pushsection .text, "ax"
> +SYM_CODE_START(ret_from_fork_asm)
> UNWIND_HINT_END_OF_STACK
> ANNOTATE_NOENDBR // copy_thread
> CALL_DEPTH_ACCOUNT
>
> + /* return address for the stack unwinder */
> + pushq $swapgs_restore_regs_and_return_to_usermode
> + UNWIND_HINT_FUNC
>
> + movq %rax, %rdi /* prev */
> + movq %rsp, %rsi /* regs */
> + movq %rbx, %rdx /* fn */
> + movq %r12, %rcx /* fn_arg */
> + jmp ret_from_fork
> +SYM_CODE_END(ret_from_fork_asm)
> .popsection
>
> .macro DEBUG_ENTRY_ASSERT_IRQS_OFF
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> index dac41a0072ea..f5dbfebac076 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
> #include <linux/static_call.h>
> #include <trace/events/power.h>
> #include <linux/hw_breakpoint.h>
> +#include <linux/entry-common.h>
> #include <asm/cpu.h>
> #include <asm/apic.h>
> #include <linux/uaccess.h>
> @@ -134,6 +135,25 @@ static int set_new_tls(struct task_struct *p, unsigned long tls)
> return do_set_thread_area_64(p, ARCH_SET_FS, tls);
> }
>
> +__visible noinstr void ret_from_fork(struct task_struct *prev, struct pt_regs *regs,
> + int (*fn)(void *), void *fn_arg)
So I had noinstr in my initial patch, but it leads to objtool
complaints. I suppose we can actually handle tracing and all the other
gunk at this point, so I've removed it.
The alternative is to use __noinstr_section(".text") if we really want
to suppress all the funnies.
> +{
> + schedule_tail(prev);
> +
> + /* Is this a kernel thread? */
> + if (unlikely(fn)) {
> + fn(fn_arg);
> + /*
> + * A kernel thread is allowed to return here after successfully
> + * calling kernel_execve(). Exit to userspace to complete the
> + * execve() syscall.
> + */
> + regs->ax = 0;
> + }
> +
> + syscall_exit_to_user_mode(regs);
> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-22 13:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-22 12:07 [PATCH 0/2] x86: Rewrite ret_from_fork() in C Brian Gerst
2023-06-22 12:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/32: Remove schedule_tail_wrapper() Brian Gerst
2023-06-22 12:07 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: Rewrite ret_from_fork() in C Brian Gerst
2023-06-22 13:29 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2023-06-22 16:04 ` Brian Gerst
2023-06-22 16:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2023-06-22 17:33 ` Brian Gerst
2023-06-23 18:12 ` Brian Gerst
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=20230622132904.GR4253@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=alyssa.milburn@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=joao@overdrivepizza.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox