Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753639AbeAFBSW (ORCPT + 1 other); Fri, 5 Jan 2018 20:18:22 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:7023 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753608AbeAFBSS (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jan 2018 20:18:18 -0500 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,320,1511856000"; d="scan'208";a="7614989" Subject: [PATCH 02/18] Documentation: document nospec helpers From: Dan Williams To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Mark Rutland , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , peterz@infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, alan@linux.intel.com Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2018 17:10:03 -0800 Message-ID: <151520100323.32271.8384226462583945132.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <151520099201.32271.4677179499894422956.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <151520099201.32271.4677179499894422956.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: StGit/0.17.1-9-g687f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: From: Mark Rutland Document the rationale and usage of the new nospec*() helpers. Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland Signed-off-by: Will Deacon Cc: Dan Williams Cc: Jonathan Corbet Cc: Peter Zijlstra Signed-off-by: Dan Williams --- Documentation/speculation.txt | 166 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 166 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/speculation.txt diff --git a/Documentation/speculation.txt b/Documentation/speculation.txt new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..748fcd4dcda4 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/speculation.txt @@ -0,0 +1,166 @@ +This document explains potential effects of speculation, and how undesirable +effects can be mitigated portably using common APIs. + +=========== +Speculation +=========== + +To improve performance and minimize average latencies, many contemporary CPUs +employ speculative execution techniques such as branch prediction, performing +work which may be discarded at a later stage. + +Typically speculative execution cannot be observed from architectural state, +such as the contents of registers. However, in some cases it is possible to +observe its impact on microarchitectural state, such as the presence or +absence of data in caches. Such state may form side-channels which can be +observed to extract secret information. + +For example, in the presence of branch prediction, it is possible for bounds +checks to be ignored by code which is speculatively executed. Consider the +following code: + + int load_array(int *array, unsigned int idx) { + if (idx >= MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS) + return 0; + else + return array[idx]; + } + +Which, on arm64, may be compiled to an assembly sequence such as: + + CMP , #MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS + B.LT less + MOV , #0 + RET + less: + LDR , [, ] + RET + +It is possible that a CPU mis-predicts the conditional branch, and +speculatively loads array[idx], even if idx >= MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS. This value +will subsequently be discarded, but the speculated load may affect +microarchitectural state which can be subsequently measured. + +More complex sequences involving multiple dependent memory accesses may result +in sensitive information being leaked. Consider the following code, building on +the prior example: + + int load_dependent_arrays(int *arr1, int *arr2, int idx) { + int val1, val2, + + val1 = load_array(arr1, idx); + val2 = load_array(arr2, val1); + + return val2; + } + +Under speculation, the first call to load_array() may return the value of an +out-of-bounds address, while the second call will influence microarchitectural +state dependent on this value. This may provide an arbitrary read primitive. + +==================================== +Mitigating speculation side-channels +==================================== + +The kernel provides a generic API to ensure that bounds checks are respected +even under speculation. Architectures which are affected by speculation-based +side-channels are expected to implement these primitives. + +The following helpers found in can be used to prevent +information from being leaked via side-channels. + +* nospec_ptr(ptr, lo, hi) + + Returns a sanitized pointer that is bounded by the [lo, hi) interval. When + ptr < lo, or ptr >= hi, NULL is returned. Prevents an out-of-bounds pointer + being propagated to code which is speculatively executed. + + This is expected to be used by code which computes pointers to data + structures, where part of the address (such as an array index) may be + user-controlled. + + This can be used to protect the earlier load_array() example: + + int load_array(int *array, unsigned int idx) + { + int *elem; + + if ((elem = nospec_ptr(array + idx, array, array + MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS))) + return *elem; + else + return 0; + } + + This can also be used in situations where multiple fields on a structure are + accessed: + + struct foo array[SIZE]; + int a, b; + + void do_thing(int idx) + { + struct foo *elem; + + if ((elem = nospec_ptr(array + idx, array, array + SIZE)) { + a = elem->field_a; + b = elem->field_b; + } + } + + It is imperative that the returned pointer is used. Pointers which are + generated separately are subject to a number of potential CPU and compiler + optimizations, and may still be used speculatively. For example, this means + that the following sequence is unsafe: + + struct foo array[SIZE]; + int a, b; + + void do_thing(int idx) + { + if (nospec_ptr(array + idx, array, array + SIZE) != NULL) { + // unsafe as wrong pointer is used + a = array[idx].field_a; + b = array[idx].field_b; + } + } + + Similarly, it is unsafe to compare the returned pointer with other pointers, + as this may permit the compiler to substitute one pointer with another, + permitting speculation. For example, the following sequence is unsafe: + + struct foo array[SIZE]; + int a, b; + + void do_thing(int idx) + { + struct foo *elem = nospec_ptr(array + idx, array, array + size); + + // unsafe due to pointer substitution + if (elem == &array[idx]) { + a = elem->field_a; + b = elem->field_b; + } + } + +* nospec_array_ptr(arr, idx, sz) + + Returns a sanitized pointer to arr[idx] only if idx falls in the [0, sz) + interval. When idx < 0 or idx > sz, NULL is returned. Prevents an + out-of-bounds pointer being propagated to code which is speculatively + executed. + + This is a convenience function which wraps nospec_ptr(), and has the same + caveats w.r.t. the use of the returned pointer. + + For example, this may be used as follows: + + int load_array(int *array, unsigned int idx) + { + int *elem; + + if ((elem = nospec_array_ptr(array, idx, MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS))) + return *elem; + else + return 0; + } +