From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>, Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
Cc: Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86: fix early boot crash on gcc-10
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 18:35:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200413163540.GD3772@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200328084858.421444-1-slyfox@gentoo.org>
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 08:48:58AM +0000, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> @@ -207,8 +207,11 @@ static int cpu0_logical_apicid;
> static int enable_start_cpu0;
> /*
> * Activate a secondary processor.
> + *
> + * Note: 'boot_init_stack_canary' changes canary value. Omit
> + * stack protection to avoid canary check (and boot) failure.
> */
> -static void notrace start_secondary(void *unused)
> +static void __no_stack_protector notrace start_secondary(void *unused)
Hmm, so we did this per-function marking only but that explodes on
32-bit, see splat at the end. gcc guys, any ideas?
The null pointer deref happens this way:
The __no_stack_protector annotated function start_secondary() calls
trace_hardirqs_on(). On entry, that function pushes the frame pointer on
the stack:
trace_hardirqs_on:
pushl %ebp #
movl %esp, %ebp #,
subl $20, %esp #,
movl %ebx, -12(%ebp) #,
movl %esi, -8(%ebp) #,
movl %edi, -4(%ebp) #,
Singlestepping the whole thing in gdb looks like this:
Dump of assembler code from 0xc1158610 to 0xc1158624:
=> 0xc1158610 <trace_hardirqs_on+0>: 55 push %ebp <---
0xc1158611 <trace_hardirqs_on+1>: 89 e5 mov %esp,%ebp
and ebp has:
...
ebp 0x0 0x0 <---
esi 0x200002 2097154
edi 0x1 1
eip 0xc1158610
...
Later in the function, it will do __builtin_return_address(n), which
turns into:
# kernel/trace/trace_preemptirq.c:26: trace_irq_enable_rcuidle(CALLER_ADDR0, CALLER_ADDR1);
movl 0(%ebp), %eax #, tmp133
<--- it loads the previously pushed 0 on the stack into %eax
# kernel/trace/trace_preemptirq.c:27: tracer_hardirqs_on(CALLER_ADDR0, CALLER_ADDR1);
movl 4(%eax), %edx #, tmp130
<--- derefs it here. Boom.
So, could it be that marking this one function like this:
static void __attribute__((optimize("-fno-stack-protector"))) __attribute__((no_instrument_function)) start_secondary(void *unused)
{
would cause %ebp to be 0 for whatever reason on 32-bit?
Interestingly enough, if I use the first variant we had where we built
the whole compilation unit with -fno-stack-protector, the issue is gone
and %ebp has the correct value:
ebp 0xf1163fac 0xf1163fac
esi 0x200002 2097154
edi 0x1 1
eip 0xc11585c0 0xc11585c0 <trace_hardirqs_on>
eflags 0x200086 [ PF SF ID ]
cs 0x60 96
ss 0x68 104
ds 0x7b 123
es 0x7b 123
fs 0xd8 216
gs 0xe0 224
=> 0xc11585c0 <trace_hardirqs_on>: push %ebp
0xf1163f84: 0x00000000c104b016 0x0000000000000000
0xf1163f94: 0x0000000000000001 0x0000000000000002
0xf1163fa4: 0x0000000001000800 0xc10001e400000000
0xf1163fb4: 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000
0xf1163fc4: 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000
Dump of assembler code from 0xc11585c0 to 0xc11585d4:
=> 0xc11585c0 <trace_hardirqs_on+0>: 55 push %ebp
0xc11585c1 <trace_hardirqs_on+1>: 89 e5 mov %esp,%ebp
Any ideas whether 32-bit behaves like this here?
Thx.
[ 0.269147] smpboot: CPU 1 Converting physical 0 to logical die 1
[ 0.269147] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 00000004
[ 0.269147] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode
[ 0.269147] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page
[ 0.269147] *pdpt = 0000000000000000 *pde = f000ff53f000ff53
[ 0.269147] Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
[ 0.269147] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 5.7.0-rc1+ #3
[ 0.269147] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.11.1-1 04/01/2014
[ 0.269147] EIP: trace_hardirqs_on+0x5e/0x110
[ 0.269147] Code: 00 00 64 c7 05 f8 20 c2 c1 00 00 00 00 8b 45 04 e8 e7 3b f7 ff 8b 5d f4 8b 75 f8 8b 7d fc c9 c3 8d 74 26 00 8b 15 00 b4 b3 c1 <8b> 48 04 8b 5d 04 85 d2 7e c4 64 a1 d4 a2 c0 c1 0f a3 05 1c 89 b4
[ 0.269147] EAX: 00000000 EBX: f1163f98 ECX: 00000000 EDX: 00000000
[ 0.269147] ESI: 00200002 EDI: 00000001 EBP: f1163f84 ESP: f1163f70
[ 0.269147] DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 00e0 SS: 0068 EFLAGS: 00210046
[ 0.269147] CR0: 80050033 CR2: 00000004 CR3: 01c2e000 CR4: 003406f0
[ 0.269147] Call Trace:
[ 0.269147] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x27/0x50
[ 0.269147] start_secondary+0x159/0x220
[ 0.269147] ? startup_32_smp+0x164/0x168
[ 0.269147] Modules linked in:
[ 0.269147] CR2: 0000000000000004
[ 0.269147] ---[ end trace e721c1dd98762fde ]---
[ 0.269147] EIP: trace_hardirqs_on+0x5e/0x110
[ 0.269147] Code: 00 00 64 c7 05 f8 20 c2 c1 00 00 00 00 8b 45 04 e8 e7 3b f7 ff 8b 5d f4 8b 75 f8 8b 7d fc c9 c3 8d 74 26 00 8b 15 00 b4 b3 c1 <8b> 48 04 8b 5d 04 85 d2 7e c4 64 a1 d4 a2 c0 c1 0f a3 05 1c 89 b4
[ 0.269147] EAX: 00000000 EBX: f1163f98 ECX: 00000000 EDX: 00000000
[ 0.269147] ESI: 00200002 EDI: 00000001 EBP: f1163f84 ESP: f1163f70
[ 0.269147] DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 00e0 SS: 0068 EFLAGS: 00210046
[ 0.269147] CR0: 80050033 CR2: 00000004 CR3: 01c2e000 CR4: 003406f0
[ 0.269147] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
[ 0.269147] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]---
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-13 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 79+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-14 16:44 [PATCH] " Sergei Trofimovich
2020-03-16 13:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-03-16 13:26 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-03-16 13:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-03-16 17:54 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-03-16 18:03 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-03-17 14:36 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-03-17 14:39 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-03-17 14:49 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-03-17 16:35 ` David Laight
2020-03-25 13:31 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-03-26 21:54 ` Sergei Trofimovich
2020-03-26 22:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-03-28 8:48 ` [PATCH v2] " Sergei Trofimovich
2020-04-13 14:15 ` [tip: x86/urgent] x86: Fix " tip-bot2 for Sergei Trofimovich
2020-04-13 16:35 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2020-04-14 13:50 ` [PATCH v2] x86: fix " Michael Matz
2020-04-15 7:48 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-15 14:53 ` Michael Matz
2020-04-15 22:19 ` Sergei Trofimovich
2020-04-17 7:57 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-17 8:07 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-04-17 8:42 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-17 8:58 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-04-17 9:09 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-17 18:15 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-04-17 18:22 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-04-17 19:06 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-04-17 19:49 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-04-17 19:53 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-04-20 14:04 ` Michael Matz
2020-04-22 10:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-22 11:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-22 13:49 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-22 13:55 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-04-22 14:16 ` Martin Liška
2020-04-22 15:06 ` Michael Matz
2020-04-22 16:53 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-22 17:02 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-04-22 18:47 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-04-22 18:55 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-04-22 19:21 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-22 21:05 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-04-22 21:26 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-22 22:57 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-04-23 12:53 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-23 16:12 ` [PATCH] x86: Fix early boot crash on gcc-10, next try Borislav Petkov
2020-04-23 17:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-23 18:02 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-04-23 18:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-27 11:37 ` [tip: x86/build] x86/build: Check whether the compiler is sane tip-bot2 for Borislav Petkov
2020-04-23 19:40 ` [PATCH] x86: Fix early boot crash on gcc-10, next try Kees Cook
2020-04-25 1:46 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-04-25 8:57 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-25 11:09 ` Jürgen Groß
2020-04-25 15:04 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-04-25 17:31 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-25 17:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-27 17:07 ` David Laight
2020-04-25 18:37 ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-04-25 18:53 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-25 19:15 ` Segher Boessenkool
2020-04-25 22:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-04-25 22:25 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-04-17 10:38 ` [PATCH v2] x86: fix early boot crash on gcc-10 Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-18 13:12 ` David Laight
2020-04-17 10:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-03-16 18:20 ` [PATCH] " Arvind Sankar
2020-03-16 18:54 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-03-16 19:53 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-03-16 20:08 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-03-16 20:40 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-03-16 22:12 ` Sergei Trofimovich
2020-03-17 11:46 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-03-17 18:10 ` Sergei Trofimovich
2020-03-16 18:22 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-03-26 23:16 ` [PATCH v2] " Sergei Trofimovich
2020-04-27 11:37 ` [tip: x86/build] x86: Fix early boot crash on gcc-10, next try tip-bot2 for Borislav Petkov
2020-05-15 11:20 ` [tip: x86/urgent] x86: Fix early boot crash on gcc-10, third try tip-bot2 for Borislav Petkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200413163540.GD3772@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=matz@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=slyfox@gentoo.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome