public inbox for llvm@lists.linux.dev
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Sami Tolvanen' <samitolvanen@google.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	"Nick Desaulniers" <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Joao Moreira <joao@overdrivepizza.com>,
	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>,
	"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"llvm@lists.linux.dev" <llvm@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v2 20/21] x86: Add support for CONFIG_CFI_CLANG
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 21:32:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <19b3e040302d4d8aa240eee43427dfaa@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABCJKueo+cw1DHH6N2dUjD-U7OKqmkJUyimm0ychv1drt5U9Rg@mail.gmail.com>

From: Sami Tolvanen
> Sent: 16 May 2022 17:39
> 
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 1:32 AM David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Sami Tolvanen
> > > Sent: 13 May 2022 21:22
> > >
> > > With CONFIG_CFI_CLANG, the compiler injects a type preamble
> > > immediately before each function and a check to validate the target
> > > function type before indirect calls:
> > >
> > >   ; type preamble
> > >   __cfi_function:
> > >     int3
> > >     int3
> > >     mov <id>, %eax
> >
> > Interesting - since this code can't be executed there is no
> > point adding an instruction 'prefix' to the 32bit constant.
> 
> The reason to embed the type into an instruction is to avoid the need
> to special case objtool's instruction decoder.
> 
> > >     int3
> > >     int3
> > >   function:
> > >     ...
> > >   ; indirect call check
> > >     cmpl    <id>, -6(%r11)
> > >     je      .Ltmp1
> > >     ud2
> > >   .Ltmp1:
> > >     call    __x86_indirect_thunk_r11
> > >
> > > Define the __CFI_TYPE helper macro for manual type annotations in
> > > assembly code, add error handling for the CFI ud2 traps, and allow
> > > CONFIG_CFI_CLANG to be selected on x86_64.
> > >
> > ...
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * The compiler generates the following instruction sequence
> > > +      * for indirect call checks:
> > > +      *
> > > +      *   cmpl    <id>, -6(%reg)     ; 7 bytes
> >
> > If the <id> is between -128 and 127 then an 8bit constant
> > (sign extended) might be used.
> > Possibly the compiler forces the assembler to generate the
> > long form.
> >
> > There could also be a REX prefix.
> > That will break any code that tries to use %reg.
> 
> The compiler always generates this specific instruction sequence.

Yes, but there are several ways to encode 'cmpl imm,-6(reg)'.
Firstly you can use '81 /7 imm32' or '83 /7 imm8' where imm8 is sign extended.
(the /7 1/7/index_reg for a signed 8 bit offset).
But that only works for the original 32bit registers.
For the 64bit r8 to r15 an extra REX prefix is required.
That makes the instruction 8 bytes (if it needs a full 32bit immediate).

So if the register is %r11 there is an extra REX byte.
If the <id> is a hash and happens to be between -128 and 127
then there are three less bytes.

So decoding from regs->ip - 0 isn't always going to give
you the start of the instruction.

> 
> > > +      *   je      .Ltmp1             ; 2 bytes
> > > +      *   ud2                        ; <- addr
> > > +      *   .Ltmp1:
> > > +      *
> > > +      * Both the type and the target address can be decoded from the
> > > +      * cmpl instruction.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (copy_from_kernel_nofault(buffer, (void *)regs->ip - 9, MAX_INSN_SIZE))
> > > +             return;
> > > +     if (insn_decode_kernel(&insn, buffer))
> > > +             return;
> > > +     if (insn.opcode.value != 0x81 || X86_MODRM_REG(insn.modrm.value) != 7)
> > > +             return;
> >
> > Since you are looking for a very specific opcode why bother
> > calling insn_decode_kernel() - just check for the required (masked)
> > byte values.
> 
> Because I need to decode both the immediate value and the register
> from that instruction.
> 
> > > +
> > > +     *type = insn.immediate.value;
> > > +
> > > +     offset = insn_get_modrm_rm_off(&insn, regs);
> >
> > Given the expected instruction, isn't that -6 ??
> 
> No, this is the register offset.

Hmmm.... strange function name...
> 
> > > +     if (offset < 0)
> > > +             return;
> > > +
> > > +     *target = *(unsigned long *)((void *)regs + offset);
> >
> > WTF is that calculating??
> 
> It's reading the register value from pt_regs.
> 
> Sami

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-16 21:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-13 20:21 [RFC PATCH v2 00/21] KCFI support Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/21] efi/libstub: Filter out CC_FLAGS_CFI Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:42   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 15:44     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/21] arm64/vdso: " Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:42   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/21] kallsyms: Ignore __kcfi_typeid_ Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:43   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/21] cfi: Remove CONFIG_CFI_CLANG_SHADOW Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:43   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/21] cfi: Drop __CFI_ADDRESSABLE Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:44   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/21] cfi: Switch to -fsanitize=kcfi Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:46   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-15  3:41   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/21] cfi: Add type helper macros Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:49   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 12:28     ` Rasmus Villemoes
2022-05-16 16:23       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 16:04     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/21] psci: Fix the function type for psci_initcall_t Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:50   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 15:44     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  8:47   ` Mark Rutland
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/21] arm64: Add types to indirect called assembly functions Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:50   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/21] arm64: Add CFI error handling Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:51   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 16:24     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 11/21] arm64: Drop unneeded __nocfi attributes Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:54   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 16:28     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 12/21] treewide: Drop function_nocfi Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:54   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 13/21] treewide: Drop WARN_ON_FUNCTION_MISMATCH Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:54   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 14/21] treewide: Drop __cficanonical Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:56   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 16:32     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 15/21] objtool: Don't warn about __cfi_ preambles falling through Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:56   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 16/21] x86/tools/relocs: Ignore __kcfi_typeid_ relocations Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:57   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 17/21] x86: Add types to indirectly called assembly functions Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:58   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 18/21] x86/purgatory: Disable CFI Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:58   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 19/21] x86/vdso: " Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:58   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 20/21] x86: Add support for CONFIG_CFI_CLANG Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 22:02   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 18:57     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-15  3:19   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16  8:32   ` David Laight
2022-05-16 16:39     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 21:32       ` David Laight [this message]
2022-05-16 21:44         ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 22:03           ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  6:44             ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17 20:36               ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  7:56             ` David Laight
2022-05-16  9:54   ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 11:45     ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 12:58       ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-20 13:49         ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-05-16 17:15     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 18:30       ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 19:39         ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 20:37           ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-25 20:02             ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 22:59         ` Kees Cook
2022-05-17  8:05           ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17  8:32             ` Joao Moreira
2022-05-17  8:40             ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17  8:48               ` David Laight
2022-05-17  9:38                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 21/21] init: Drop __nocfi from __init Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 22:03   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 17:16     ` Sami Tolvanen
     [not found] ` <CA+icZUWr+-HjMvY1VZf+nqjTadxSTDciux0Y5Y-+p_j4o7CmXg@mail.gmail.com>
2022-05-16 17:57   ` [RFC PATCH v2 00/21] KCFI support Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  7:33     ` Sedat Dilek
2022-05-17 18:49       ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-05-19  9:01         ` Sedat Dilek
2022-05-19 20:26           ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-05-19 20:41             ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  8:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17 20:25   ` Sami Tolvanen

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=19b3e040302d4d8aa240eee43427dfaa@AcuMS.aculab.com \
    --to=david.laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=joao@overdrivepizza.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
    --cc=sedat.dilek@gmail.com \
    --cc=will@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