LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Joao Moreira <joao@overdrivepizza.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
hjl.tools@gmail.com, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/6] objtool: Add IBT validation / fixups
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 13:38:18 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABCJKuciRBnz4JxBDJC=+kuJn4pU2uBkWPBov7-VL2o2j0F4SA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220211133803.GV23216@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 5:38 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> I think we'll end up with something related to KCFI, but with distinct
> differences:
>
> - 32bit immediates for smaller code
Sure, I don't see issues with that. Based on a quick test with
defconfig, this reduces vmlinux size by 0.30%.
> - __kcfi_check_fail() is out for smaller code
I'm fine with adding a trap mode that's used by default, but having
more helpful diagnostics when something fails is useful even in
production systems in my experience. This change results in a vmlinux
that's another 0.92% smaller.
> Which then yields:
>
> caller:
> cmpl $0xdeadbeef, -0x4(%rax) # 7 bytes
> je 1f # 2 bytes
> ud2 # 2 bytes
> 1: call __x86_indirect_thunk_rax # 5 bytes
Note that the compiler might not emit this *exact* sequence of
instructions. For example, Clang generates this for events_sysfs_show
with the modified KCFI patch:
2274: cmpl $0x4d7bed9e,-0x4(%r11)
227c: jne 22c0 <events_sysfs_show+0x6c>
227e: call 2283 <events_sysfs_show+0x2f>
227f: R_X86_64_PLT32 __x86_indirect_thunk_r11-0x4
...
22c0: ud2
In this case the function has two indirect calls and Clang seems to
prefer to emit just one ud2.
> .align 16
> .byte 0xef, 0xbe, 0xad, 0xde # 4 bytes
> func:
> endbr # 4 bytes
Here func is no longer aligned to 16 bytes, in case that's important.
> Further, Andrew put in the request for __attribute__((cfi_seed(blah)))
> to allow distinguishing indirect functions with otherwise identical
> signature; eg. cookie = hash32(blah##signature).
Sounds reasonable.
> Did I miss anything? Got anything wrong?
How would you like to deal with the 4-byte hashes in objtool? We
either need to annotate all function symbols in the kernel, or we need
a way to distinguish the hashes from random instructions, so we can
also have functions that don't have a type hash.
Sami
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-14 21:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-22 17:03 [RFC][PATCH 0/6] x86: Kernel IBT beginnings Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-22 17:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/6] x86: Annotate _THIS_IP_ Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-23 13:53 ` Mark Rutland
2021-11-23 14:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-24 18:18 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-11-22 17:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/6] x86: Base IBT bits Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-08 23:32 ` Kees Cook
2021-11-22 17:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/6] x86: Add ENDBR to IRET-to-Self Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-22 18:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-08 23:33 ` Kees Cook
2021-11-22 17:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/6] objtool: Read the _THIS_IP_ hints Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-22 17:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/6] x86: Sprinkle ENDBR dust Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-23 14:00 ` Mark Rutland
2021-11-23 14:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-08 23:38 ` Kees Cook
2021-11-22 17:03 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/6] objtool: Add IBT validation / fixups Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-24 19:30 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-02-08 23:43 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-09 5:09 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-02-09 11:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-09 11:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-12-24 2:05 ` joao
2022-02-08 23:42 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-09 2:21 ` Joao Moreira
2022-02-09 4:05 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-09 5:18 ` Joao Moreira
2022-02-11 13:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-14 21:38 ` Sami Tolvanen [this message]
2022-02-14 22:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-15 16:56 ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-02-15 20:03 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-15 21:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-15 23:05 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-15 23:38 ` Joao Moreira
2022-02-16 12:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-15 20:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-15 22:45 ` Joao Moreira
2022-02-16 0:57 ` Andrew Cooper
2022-03-02 3:06 ` Peter Collingbourne
2022-03-02 3:32 ` Joao Moreira
2022-06-08 17:53 ` Fāng-ruì Sòng
2022-06-09 0:05 ` Sami Tolvanen
2021-11-23 7:58 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/6] x86: Kernel IBT beginnings Christoph Hellwig
2021-11-23 9:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-08 23:48 ` Kees Cook
2022-02-09 0:09 ` Nick Desaulniers
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='CABCJKuciRBnz4JxBDJC=+kuJn4pU2uBkWPBov7-VL2o2j0F4SA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=joao@overdrivepizza.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--subject='Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/6] objtool: Add IBT validation / fixups' \
/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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).