Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 26 May 2020 10:13:40 -0700
From:   Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>
To:     Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Cc:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Dmitry Golovin <dima@golovin.in>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] x86/boot: Check that there are no runtime
 relocations
Message-ID: <20200526171340.pdbautbix5ygdvgp@google.com>
References: <20200524212816.243139-1-nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
 <20200525225918.1624470-5-nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
 <CAMj1kXHc4o91VkaChoyVzr4w-HOaashMPtkCKLaszMGCxhR_2A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200526151623.GB2190602@rani.riverdale.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200526151623.GB2190602@rani.riverdale.lan>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 2020-05-26, Arvind Sankar wrote:
>On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 08:11:56AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 00:59, Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> >  # Compressed kernel should be built as PIE since it may be loaded at any
>> >  # address by the bootloader.
>> > -KBUILD_LDFLAGS += $(call ld-option, -pie) $(call ld-option, --no-dynamic-linker)
>> > +KBUILD_LDFLAGS += -pie $(call ld-option, --no-dynamic-linker)
>>
>> Do we still need -pie linking with these changes applied?
>>
>
>I think it's currently not strictly necessary -- eg the 64bit kernel
>doesn't get linked as pie right now with LLD or old binutils. However,
>it is safer to do so to ensure that the result remains PIC with future
>versions of the linker. There are linker optimizations that can convert
>certain PIC instructions when PIE is disabled. While I think they
>currently all focus on eliminating indirection through the GOT (and thus
>wouldn't be applicable any more),

There are 3 forms described by x86-64 psABI B.2 Optimize GOTPCRELX Relocations

(1) movq foo@GOTPCREL(%rip), %reg -> leaq foo(%rip), %reg
(2) call *foo@GOTPCREL(%rip) -> nop; call foo
(3) jmp *foo@GOTPCREL(%rip) -> jmp foo; nop

ld.bfd and gold perform (1) even for R_X86_64_GOTPCREL. LLD requires R_X86_64_[REX_]GOTPCRELX

>it's easy to imagine that they could
>get extended to, for eg, convert
>	leaq	foo(%rip), %rax
>to
>	movl	$foo, %eax
>with some nop padding, etc.

Not with NOP padding, but probably with instruction prefixes. It is
unclear the rewriting will be beneficial. Rewriting instructions definitely requires a
dedicated relocation type like R_X86_64_[REX_]GOTPCRELX.

>Also, the relocation check that's being added here would only work with
>PIE linking.