2018-11-01 09:35:24

by Zhenzhong Duan

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] retpolines: Only enable retpoline support when compiler support it

Since retpoline capable compilers are widely available, make
CONFIG_RETPOLINE hard depend on it.

The check of RETPOLINE is changed to CONFIG_RETPOLINE.

This change is based on suggestion in https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/18/1016

Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]>
Cc: David Woodhouse <[email protected]>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <[email protected]>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <[email protected]>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <[email protected]>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <[email protected]>
Cc: Michal Marek <[email protected]>
---
arch/x86/Kconfig | 6 ++----
arch/x86/Makefile | 4 +---
arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h | 10 ++++++----
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c | 2 +-
scripts/Makefile.build | 2 --
5 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
index ffebfc3f..277e0df 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -436,6 +436,8 @@ config GOLDFISH

config RETPOLINE
bool "Avoid speculative indirect branches in kernel"
+ depends on $(cc-option,-mindirect-branch=thunk-extern -mindirect-branch-register) || \
+ $(cc-option,-mretpoline-external-thunk)
default y
select STACK_VALIDATION if HAVE_STACK_VALIDATION
help
@@ -444,10 +446,6 @@ config RETPOLINE
branches. Requires a compiler with -mindirect-branch=thunk-extern
support for full protection. The kernel may run slower.

- Without compiler support, at least indirect branches in assembler
- code are eliminated. Since this includes the syscall entry path,
- it is not entirely pointless.
-
config INTEL_RDT
bool "Intel Resource Director Technology support"
depends on X86 && CPU_SUP_INTEL
diff --git a/arch/x86/Makefile b/arch/x86/Makefile
index 5b562e4..30573dd 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Makefile
+++ b/arch/x86/Makefile
@@ -222,9 +222,7 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS += -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables

# Avoid indirect branches in kernel to deal with Spectre
ifdef CONFIG_RETPOLINE
-ifneq ($(RETPOLINE_CFLAGS),)
- KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(RETPOLINE_CFLAGS) -DRETPOLINE
-endif
+ KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(RETPOLINE_CFLAGS)
endif

archscripts: scripts_basic
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h
index 80dc144..8b09cbb 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h
@@ -162,11 +162,12 @@
_ASM_PTR " 999b\n\t" \
".popsection\n\t"

-#if defined(CONFIG_X86_64) && defined(RETPOLINE)
+#ifdef CONFIG_RETPOLINE
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64

/*
- * Since the inline asm uses the %V modifier which is only in newer GCC,
- * the 64-bit one is dependent on RETPOLINE not CONFIG_RETPOLINE.
+ * Inline asm uses the %V modifier which is only in newer GCC
+ * which is ensured when CONFIG_RETPOLINE is defined.
*/
# define CALL_NOSPEC \
ANNOTATE_NOSPEC_ALTERNATIVE \
@@ -181,7 +182,7 @@
X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE_AMD)
# define THUNK_TARGET(addr) [thunk_target] "r" (addr)

-#elif defined(CONFIG_X86_32) && defined(CONFIG_RETPOLINE)
+#else /* CONFIG_X86_32 */
/*
* For i386 we use the original ret-equivalent retpoline, because
* otherwise we'll run out of registers. We don't care about CET
@@ -211,6 +212,7 @@
X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE_AMD)

# define THUNK_TARGET(addr) [thunk_target] "rm" (addr)
+#endif
#else /* No retpoline for C / inline asm */
# define CALL_NOSPEC "call *%[thunk_target]\n"
# define THUNK_TARGET(addr) [thunk_target] "rm" (addr)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
index c37e66e..d0108fb 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
@@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ static void __init spec2_print_if_secure(const char *reason)

static inline bool retp_compiler(void)
{
- return __is_defined(RETPOLINE);
+ return __is_defined(CONFIG_RETPOLINE);
}

static inline bool match_option(const char *arg, int arglen, const char *opt)
diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.build b/scripts/Makefile.build
index a8e7ba9..6a6be9f 100644
--- a/scripts/Makefile.build
+++ b/scripts/Makefile.build
@@ -236,10 +236,8 @@ ifdef CONFIG_GCOV_KERNEL
objtool_args += --no-unreachable
endif
ifdef CONFIG_RETPOLINE
-ifneq ($(RETPOLINE_CFLAGS),)
objtool_args += --retpoline
endif
-endif


ifdef CONFIG_MODVERSIONS
--
1.8.3.1


2018-11-01 09:52:15

by Ingo Molnar

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] retpolines: Only enable retpoline support when compiler support it


* Zhenzhong Duan <[email protected]> wrote:

> Since retpoline capable compilers are widely available, make
> CONFIG_RETPOLINE hard depend on it.
>
> The check of RETPOLINE is changed to CONFIG_RETPOLINE.
>
> This change is based on suggestion in https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/18/1016
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <[email protected]>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>

Please turn such 'based on suggestions' into proper tags as well, i.e.
something like:

Suggested-by: David Woodhouse <[email protected]>

> config RETPOLINE
> bool "Avoid speculative indirect branches in kernel"
> + depends on $(cc-option,-mindirect-branch=thunk-extern -mindirect-branch-register) || \
> + $(cc-option,-mretpoline-external-thunk)

At least a comment should be added that this is the retpoline feature
check for GCC and Clang.

Also, whitespace damage plus the two options should align vertically.

Thanks,

Ingo

2018-11-01 12:19:09

by Thomas Gleixner

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] retpolines: Only enable retpoline support when compiler support it

On Thu, 1 Nov 2018, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-11-01 at 10:50 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Zhenzhong Duan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Since retpoline capable compilers are widely available, make
> > > CONFIG_RETPOLINE hard depend on it.
> > >
> > > The check of RETPOLINE is changed to CONFIG_RETPOLINE.
> > >
> > > This change is based on suggestion in https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/18/1016
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
> >
> > Please turn such 'based on suggestions' into proper tags as well, i.e.
> > something like:
> >
> > Suggested-by: David Woodhouse <[email protected]>
>
> I think the suggestion came from PeterZ; I just acked it.
>
> Although on furthe reflection, I think I'd prefer a build break if
> retpoline is enabled in the kernel config and the compiler doesn't
> support it. This patch would make it silently fail to be secure.

Agreed.

Thanks,

tglx

2018-11-01 14:37:07

by Ingo Molnar

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] retpolines: Only enable retpoline support when compiler support it


* Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 1 Nov 2018, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-11-01 at 10:50 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Zhenzhong Duan <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Since retpoline capable compilers are widely available, make
> > > > CONFIG_RETPOLINE hard depend on it.
> > > >
> > > > The check of RETPOLINE is changed to CONFIG_RETPOLINE.
> > > >
> > > > This change is based on suggestion in https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/18/1016
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <[email protected]>
> > > > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
> > > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Please turn such 'based on suggestions' into proper tags as well, i.e.
> > > something like:
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: David Woodhouse <[email protected]>
> >
> > I think the suggestion came from PeterZ; I just acked it.
> >
> > Although on furthe reflection, I think I'd prefer a build break if
> > retpoline is enabled in the kernel config and the compiler doesn't
> > support it. This patch would make it silently fail to be secure.
>
> Agreed.

Yeah, I agree that that's the best policy: if someone wants retpoline
support it shouldn't silently turn off just because the wrong toolchain
was used to build the kernel ...

Thanks,

Ingo