From: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
alyssa.milburn@intel.com, scott.d.constable@intel.com,
Joao Moreira <joao@overdrivepizza.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
ojeda@kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86,ibt: Use UDB instead of 0xEA
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 16:28:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <26657aee-588e-41c1-9208-316916e3ce58@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250815075708.GB3419281@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 15/8/25 15:57, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 08:42:39AM +0300, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 2:17 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> A while ago FineIBT started using the instruction 0xEA to generate #UD.
>>> All existing parts will generate #UD in 64bit mode on that instruction.
>>>
>>> However; Intel/AMD have not blessed using this instruction, it is on
>>> their 'reserved' list for future use.
>>>
>>> Peter Anvin worked the committees and got use of 0xD6 blessed, and it
>>> will be called UDB (per the next SDM or so).
>>>
>>> Reworking the FineIBT code to use UDB wasn't entirely trivial, and I've
>>> had to switch the hash register to EAX in order to free up some bytes.
>>>
>>> Per the x86_64 ABI, EAX is used to pass the number of vector registers
>>> for varargs -- something that should not happen in the kernel. More so,
>>> we build with -mskip-rax-setup, which should leave EAX completely unused
>>> in the calling convention.
>>
>> rax is used to pass tail_call count.
>> See diagram in commit log:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240714123902.32305-2-hffilwlqm@gmail.com/
>> Before that commit rax was used differently.
>> Bottom line rax was used for a long time to support bpf_tail_calls.
>> I'm traveling atm. So cc-ing folks for follow ups.
>
> IIRC the bpf2bpf tailcall doesn't use CFI at the moment. But let me
> double check.
>
> So emit_cfi() is called at the very start of emit_prologue() and
> __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline() in the BPF_TRAMP_F_INDIRECT case.
>
> Now, emit_prologue() starts with the CFI bits, but the tailcall lands at
> X86_TAIL_CALL_OFFSET, at which spot we only have EMIT_ENDBR(), nothing
> else. So RAX should be unaffected at that point.
>
> So, AFAICT, we're good on that point. It is just the C level indirect
> function call ABI that is affected, BPF internal conventions are
> unaffected.
>
RAX is used for propagating tail_call_cnt_ptr from caller to callee for
bpf2bpf+tailcall on x86_64.
Before the aforementioned commit, RAX is used for propagating
tail_call_cnt from caller to callee for the case.
Thanks,
Leon
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-15 8:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-14 11:17 [RFC][PATCH] x86,ibt: Use UDB instead of 0xEA Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-14 11:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-14 19:40 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-08-15 1:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-08-15 7:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-15 10:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-15 10:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-15 10:43 ` Andrew Cooper
2025-08-15 10:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-15 11:19 ` Andrew Cooper
2025-08-15 17:14 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-08-15 17:21 ` Andrew Cooper
2025-08-15 17:28 ` H. Peter Anvin
2025-08-15 5:42 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-08-15 7:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-15 8:28 ` Leon Hwang [this message]
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=26657aee-588e-41c1-9208-316916e3ce58@gmail.com \
--to=hffilwlqm@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=alyssa.milburn@intel.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=joao@overdrivepizza.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=scott.d.constable@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