Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 11 Feb 2019 10:15:03 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/alternatives: check int3 breakpoint physical
 addresses
In-Reply-To: <8995b3b4-b805-c8c7-95a8-a39ab000f289@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1902111012130.1728@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
References: <1548428249-8258-1-git-send-email-alexandre.chartre@oracle.com> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1902102221500.8784@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <8995b3b4-b805-c8c7-95a8-a39ab000f289@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, Alexandre Chartre wrote:
> On 02/10/2019 10:23 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2019, Alexandre Chartre wrote:
> > > Note that this issue has been observed and reproduced with a custom kernel
> > > with some code mapped to different virtual addresses and using jump labels
> > > As jump labels use text_poke_bp(), crashes were sometimes observed when
> > > updating jump labels.
> > 
> > Rightfully so. text_poke_bp() pokes at the kernels text mapping which is
> > very well defined and unique. Why would you map the same text to different
> > virtual addresses and then use a randomly chosen one to poke at it?
> > 
> 
> As an example, we used to have per-CPU SYSCALL entry trampoline [1] where the
> entry_SYSCALL_64_trampoline function was mapped to a different virtual address
> for each CPU. So, a syscall would execute entry_SYSCALL_64_trampoline() from a
> different virtual address depending on the CPU being used. With that code,
> adding a jump label in entry_SYSCALL_64_trampoline() causes the described
> issue.

Right, but we knew that and there was no reason to put a jump label into
that. AFAICT we don't have anything like this in the kernel.

That said, I'm not opposed to apply the patch as is, I just wanted to get a
better understanding about the background.

Thanks,

	tglx