From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Kunbo Zhang <absoler@smail.nju.edu.cn>
Cc: dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, tiwai@suse.de,
wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, security@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] input: i8042 - fix a double-fetch vulnerability introduced by GCC
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 11:45:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2TtXAW1LhOwlE64@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221104072347.74314-1-absoler@smail.nju.edu.cn>
On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 03:23:47PM +0800, Kunbo Zhang wrote:
> We found GCC (at least 9.4.0 and 12.1) introduces a double-fetch of `i8042_ports[I8042_AUX_PORT_NO].serio` at drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:408.
>
> One comparison of the global variable `i8042_ports[I8042_AUX_PORT_NO].serio` has been compiled to three ones,
> and thus two extra fetches are introduced.
And what problem does this cause?
> As in the source code, the global variable is tested (at line 408) before three assignments of irq_bit, disable_bit and port_name.
> However, as shown in the following disassembly of i8042_port_close(),
> the variable (0x0(%rip)) is fetched and tested three times for each
> assignment of irq_bit, disable_bit and port_name.
There should not be any problem with this as that value does not ever
change except in rare cases (shutdown or init).
>
> 0000000000000e50 <i8042_port_close>:
> i8042_port_close():
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:408
> e50: 48 39 3d 00 00 00 00 cmp %rdi,0x0(%rip) # first load
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:403
> e57: 41 54 push %r12
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:408
> e59: b8 ef ff ff ff mov $0xffffffef,%eax
> e5e: 49 c7 c4 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%r12
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:403
> e65: 55 push %rbp
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:408
> e66: 48 c7 c2 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%rdx
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:419
> e6d: be 60 10 00 00 mov $0x1060,%esi
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:403
> e72: 53 push %rbx
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:408
> e73: bb df ff ff ff mov $0xffffffdf,%ebx
> e78: 0f 45 d8 cmovne %eax,%ebx
> e7b: 0f 95 c0 setne %al
> e7e: 83 e8 03 sub $0x3,%eax
> e81: 48 39 3d 00 00 00 00 cmp %rdi,0x0(%rip) # second load
> e88: 40 0f 94 c5 sete %bpl
> e8c: 83 c5 01 add $0x1,%ebp
> e8f: 48 39 3d 00 00 00 00 cmp %rdi,0x0(%rip) # third load
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:419
> e96: 48 c7 c7 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%rdi
> ./drivers/input/serio/i8042.c:408
> e9d: 4c 0f 45 e2 cmovne %rdx,%r12
>
> We have not found any lock protection for the three fetches of `i8042_ports[I8042_AUX_PORT_NO].serio` yet.
> If the value of this global variable is modified concurrently among the three fetches, the corresponding assignment of
> disable_bit or port_name will possibly be incorrect.
When can that modification happen?
And if you really want to protect it, use the existing lock in the
structure, don't manually attempt to place calls to barrier(), that will
not work, sorry.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-04 10:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-04 7:23 [PATCH] input: i8042 - fix a double-fetch vulnerability introduced by GCC Kunbo Zhang
2022-11-04 8:04 ` Bagas Sanjaya
2022-11-04 10:45 ` Greg KH [this message]
2022-11-04 18:23 ` Dmitry Torokhov
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=Y2TtXAW1LhOwlE64@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=absoler@smail.nju.edu.cn \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=security@kernel.org \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.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