Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 16:33:04 -0800
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Luis Henriques <lhenriques@...e.com>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, 
	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/10] x86: narrow out of bounds syscalls to sys_read
 under speculation

On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
>>
>> At that point we're basically just back to the array_ptr() version
>> that returned a sanitized pointer to an array element.
>
> .. that one does an extra unnecessary 'andq' instead of the duplicated
> cmp.  But at least it avoids comparing that 32-bit integer twice, so
> it's probably slightly smaller.
>
> (And your code generation is without the "r" -> "ir" fix for the size argument)
>
> Probably doesn't matter. But a "asm goto" would give you at least
> potentially optimal code.
>

Should we go with array_element_nospec() in the meantime? So we're not
depending on jump labels? With the constraint fix and killing that
superfluous AND the assembly is now:

     e26:       48 81 fd 4d 01 00 00    cmp    $0x14d,%rbp
     e2d:       48 19 d2                sbb    %rdx,%rdx
                        NR_syscalls);
        if (likely(call))
     e30:       48 21 d0                and    %rdx,%rax
     e33:       74 1e                   je     e53 <do_syscall_64+0x73>
                regs->ax = (*call)(regs->di, regs->si, regs->dx,
     e35:       48 8b 4b 38             mov    0x38(%rbx),%rcx
     e39:       48 8b 53 60             mov    0x60(%rbx),%rdx
     e3d:       48 8b 73 68             mov    0x68(%rbx),%rsi
     e41:       48 8b 7b 70             mov    0x70(%rbx),%rdi
     e45:       4c 8b 4b 40             mov    0x40(%rbx),%r9
     e49:       4c 8b 43 48             mov    0x48(%rbx),%r8
     e4d:       ff 10                   callq  *(%rax)
     e4f:       48 89 43 50             mov    %rax,0x50(%rbx)
     e53:       65 48 8b 04 25 00 00    mov    %gs:0x0,%rax

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.