Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751576AbbFMHEO (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Jun 2015 03:04:14 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com ([209.85.212.181]:38849 "EHLO mail-wi0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750939AbbFMHEF (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Jun 2015 03:04:05 -0400 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 09:03:59 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Brian Gerst Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Andy Lutomirski , Srinivas Pandruvada , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Pavel Machek , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , X86 ML , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Denys Vlasenko , Borislav Petkov , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: General protection fault after STR (32 bit systems only) Message-ID: <20150613070359.GB26502@gmail.com> References: <1434066338-6619-1-git-send-email-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> <20150612060747.GA25024@gmail.com> <20150612075013.GA8759@gmail.com> <20150612083625.GA22760@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2663 Lines: 79 * Brian Gerst wrote: > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 4:36 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > >> %es is used implicitly by string instructions. > > > > Ok, so we are probably better off reloading ES as well early, right > > when we return from the firmware, just in case something does > > a copy before we hit the ES restore in restore_processor_state(), > > which is a generic C function? > > > > Something like the patch below? > > > > I also added FS/GS/SS reloading to make it complete. If this (or a variant > > thereof, it's still totally untested) works then we can remove the segment > > save/restore layer in __save/restore_processor_state(). > > > > Thanks, > > > > Ingo > > > > ===========> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/wakeup_32.S | 13 +++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/wakeup_32.S b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/wakeup_32.S > > index 665c6b7d2ea9..1376a7fc21b7 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/wakeup_32.S > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/wakeup_32.S > > @@ -61,6 +61,19 @@ ENTRY(wakeup_pmode_return) > > > > > > restore_registers: > > + /* > > + * In case the BIOS corrupted our segment descriptors, > > + * reload them to clear out any shadow descriptor > > + * state: > > + */ > > + movl $__USER_DS, %eax > > + movl %eax, %ds > > + movl %eax, %es > > + movl %eax, %fs > > + movl %eax, %gs > > + movl $__KERNEL_DS, %eax > > + movl %eax, %ss > > + > > movl saved_context_ebp, %ebp > > movl saved_context_ebx, %ebx > > movl saved_context_esi, %esi > > If you follow the convoluted flow of the calls in this file, wakeup_pmode_return > is the first thing called from the trampoline on resume, and that loads the data > segments with __KERNEL_DS. [...] So if wakeup_pmode_return is really the first thing called then the whole premise of shadow descriptor corruption goes out the window: we reload all relevant segment registers. Which leaves us with only two small channels through which the patch might make a bug go away: - timing, as it introduces a small delay - code/cache layout, as it slightly rearranges the code ... but both of these are in the 'grasping at straws' category of hypotheses really. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/