Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:7420:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id hk32csp574681pxb; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 22:33:57 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJypUE8ijljj7NGOSreeUijamoAd4s8TwGxAHgwl0Vj5IGEZpcsSjQNudeaPKE1vAjBQq7Zu X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:760e:b0:14f:26a6:cdef with SMTP id k14-20020a170902760e00b0014f26a6cdefmr1107779pll.149.1644993237055; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 22:33:57 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1644993237; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=eNCnxRCnBKlLLYCF6DxglBhH5R6tbU2Ya2apA9pt/Axux5RgWj5adYZxQIDbPWiUUp BmJxx9UwRbbpK2CqdeNVsuMqaldaiGicqDCU7OcD/jlzstkydyAdEO472Y7QpC4p0+ko cp+wakO0S9ygTqEANxiUlbGR5e79AOZTIW+9emja4kRnk0+tVuvYb1blxNYCX6ECRzYp JFj7gcPeMNUOxFEjr89WKGV7+1krxZ882HZ7cskHkQMuvHjqgVCev4HOTrQ4b7n0pa+7 On6LDq8AjonQbFSftAYhd3tkYNfvF3F+zzDGgNUTb86X8PYl9VoHnVm8XlIc62vZ/bK4 bCUA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=xFoXp1iXxwPnqPJm6+R4iAU7d160QC7MYGNnmZh/iBg=; b=iTr+CQh7oGA9Nzc4eQ4JFDPYYNYvnQdNHJ0GENfmcK9E5E95OdkJ5P73ySbs2mi2g0 /TIDv3+0CPFJeZ/T31avBCH4YxKFrt1Rofqmp+ai7GgA03tYSTM5cSzQ2byHLn0F1jCH QZtUjTixzq2pMs/3Bqa0Z9giT1EbSzYmgKxnRK5XCVB1utIezjHbQB09MKa6qoyKVk2/ 3cCzLFYDt30luTrhysSNh70FiRLeNrn5XEHS8uBSZqt7BZn65wsyUP0u70akl3TIYCpO 4eKDWvJriqcp9ofDPXB8Xp/+Ro0+Lpk7NlXevh/YZnBgi++yhkQYtEY8d0vnERihjncr aUFg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@chromium.org header.s=google header.b=kQ3XkCI8; spf=softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=chromium.org Return-Path: Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net. [23.128.96.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j3si16374790plr.339.2022.02.15.22.33.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 22:33:57 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@chromium.org header.s=google header.b=kQ3XkCI8; spf=softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=chromium.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08D72638E; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 22:26:22 -0800 (PST) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235157AbiBOXGL (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 18:06:11 -0500 Received: from mxb-00190b01.gslb.pphosted.com ([23.128.96.19]:38914 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232085AbiBOXGK (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 18:06:10 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x1029.google.com (mail-pj1-x1029.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1029]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92F77E3891 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:05:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x1029.google.com with SMTP id y9so735663pjf.1 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:05:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xFoXp1iXxwPnqPJm6+R4iAU7d160QC7MYGNnmZh/iBg=; b=kQ3XkCI8aIjA5Ugam7/F4NKdZ3ib0Caocmpb4cMY+oXEk7UdngLyy7C5ZthE2yi4T+ 8ancU/wgUoU8Ie/JRkBYI1vQi5P7ZRB8cOA+jrBJRKXuxHUy9R1SJCWzN2TK/GFlCF5V XSHRhRkKiZFOBTRHm3pDqNPDRTvyKEPS1YWEU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xFoXp1iXxwPnqPJm6+R4iAU7d160QC7MYGNnmZh/iBg=; b=RxTr0c+RTXy1MmSSwD7lmAQT3pUzGke1A/lQjMnhVLMvMlARv2itpM3He1V18bKr0E HiGLp8CtKSUs5O7zv5e1uoEEmnk+2Nu/dhiNcIu/nIvm18bTxup1qNqSE1losVu2H4Yl OA9AY7mRawhYbnOxNuTFBQ1Y/1J34tR+AEobJx8jmjou3OXwDIEzSYOJZYNFAySzkKTY N5pFdueEH5gSN9TJfSsZKKZ49b6O+2Ls/PRAruUbCxasCxmbMpWhZZrJfhlwquyS9KTb A1uDT1QwQGahzZcWitRt8ktfEpMNmYDOMRmuyG9QSZlWahtJOjuWFJBZiK/xGOQ/kqUv GWcA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533QJzTvDOjTT9wwAN322fShRI0PvbPBmfPqH1+dtIj1LBRg8GcP +BhlBovMUH0F6Pssr5zSfm/rFA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:cf07:: with SMTP id i7mr1278462plg.137.1644966359102; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:05:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id pj8sm9590566pjb.54.2022.02.15.15.05.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:05:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:05:57 -0800 From: Kees Cook To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Sami Tolvanen , Joao Moreira , X86 ML , hjl.tools@gmail.com, Josh Poimboeuf , andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, LKML , Nick Desaulniers , llvm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/6] objtool: Add IBT validation / fixups Message-ID: <202202151503.91E9B76B@keescook> References: <202202081541.900F9E1B@keescook> <202202082003.FA77867@keescook> <9ea50c51ee8db366430c9dc697a83923@overdrivepizza.com> <20220211133803.GV23216@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20220214222550.GB23216@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <202202151129.1A5C5FE42@keescook> <20220215210550.GD23216@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220215210550.GD23216@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:05:50PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 12:03:12PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 08:56:03AM -0800, Sami Tolvanen wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 2:25 PM Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 01:38:18PM -0800, Sami Tolvanen wrote: > > > > > I'm fine with adding a trap mode that's used by default, but having > > > > > more helpful diagnostics when something fails is useful even in > > > > > production systems in my experience. This change results in a vmlinux > > > > > that's another 0.92% smaller. > > > > > > > > You can easily have the exception generate a nice warning, you can even > > > > have it continue. You really don't need a call for that. > > > > > > Sure, but wouldn't that require us to generate something like > > > __bug_table, so we know where the CFI specific traps are? > > > > It also means the trap handler needs to do a bunch of instruction > > decoding to find the address that was going to be jumped to, etc. > > arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c:apply_retpolines() has all that, since we > need to to know that to re-write the thunk-call. Ah, okay, well that makes things easier. :) > > > > > In this case the function has two indirect calls and Clang seems to > > > > > prefer to emit just one ud2. > > > > > > > > That will not allow you to recover from the exception. UD2 is not an > > > > unconditional fail. It should have an out-going edge in this case too. > > > > > > Yes, CFI failures are not recoverable in that code. In fact, LLVM > > > assumes that the llvm.trap intrinsic (i.e. ud2) never returns, but I > > > suppose we could just use an int3 instead. I assume that's sufficient > > > to stop speculation? > > > > Peter, is there a reason you want things in the specific order of: > > > > cmp, je-to-call, trap, call > > > > Isn't it more run-time efficient to have an out-of-line failure of > > the form: > > > > cmp, jne-to-trap, call, ...code..., trap, jmp-to-call > > > > I thought the static label stuff allowed the "default out of line" > > option, as far as pessimizing certain states, etc? The former is certainly > > code-size smaller, though, yes, but doesn't it waste space in the cache > > line for the unlikely case, etc? > > Mostly so that we can deduce the address of the trap from the retpoline > site, also the above has a fairly high chance of using jcc.d32 which is > actually larger than jcc.d8+ud2. Ah, yeah, that's an interesting point. Still, I worry about finding ways to convinces Clang to emit precisely cmp/je/trap/call, but I guess we'll catch it immediately if it doesn't. :P -- Kees Cook