From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: x86@kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
alyssa.milburn@intel.com, scott.d.constable@intel.com,
joao@overdrivepizza.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com,
jpoimboe@kernel.org, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com,
ebiggers@kernel.org, samitolvanen@google.com, kees@kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 7/8] x86/ibt: Clean up poison_endbr()
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 12:39:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241105114522.514586258@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241105113901.348320374@infradead.org>
Basically, get rid of the .warn argument and explicitly don't call the
function when we know there isn't an endbr. This makes the calling
code clearer.
Note: perhaps don't add functions to .cfi_sites when the function
doesn't have endbr -- OTOH why would the compiler emit the prefix if
it has already determined there are no indirect callers and has
omitted the ENDBR instruction.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
---
arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
@@ -864,14 +864,12 @@ __noendbr bool is_endbr(u32 *val)
static void poison_cfi(void *addr);
-static void __init_or_module poison_endbr(void *addr, bool warn)
+static void __init_or_module poison_endbr(void *addr)
{
u32 poison = gen_endbr_poison();
- if (!is_endbr(addr)) {
- WARN_ON_ONCE(warn);
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!is_endbr(addr)))
return;
- }
DPRINTK(ENDBR, "ENDBR at: %pS (%px)", addr, addr);
@@ -896,7 +894,7 @@ void __init_or_module noinline apply_sea
for (s = start; s < end; s++) {
void *addr = (void *)s + *s;
- poison_endbr(addr, true);
+ poison_endbr(addr);
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FINEIBT))
poison_cfi(addr - 16);
}
@@ -1203,6 +1201,14 @@ static int cfi_rewrite_preamble(s32 *sta
void *addr = (void *)s + *s;
u32 hash;
+ /*
+ * When the function doesn't start with ENDBR the compiler will
+ * have determined there are no indirect calls to it and we
+ * don't need no CFI either.
+ */
+ if (!is_endbr(addr + 16))
+ continue;
+
hash = decode_preamble_hash(addr);
if (WARN(!hash, "no CFI hash found at: %pS %px %*ph\n",
addr, addr, 5, addr))
@@ -1223,7 +1229,10 @@ static void cfi_rewrite_endbr(s32 *start
for (s = start; s < end; s++) {
void *addr = (void *)s + *s;
- poison_endbr(addr+16, false);
+ if (!is_endbr(addr + 16))
+ continue;
+
+ poison_endbr(addr + 16);
}
}
@@ -1356,9 +1365,23 @@ static inline void poison_hash(void *add
static void poison_cfi(void *addr)
{
+ /*
+ * Compilers manage to be inconsistent with ENDBR vs __cfi prefixes,
+ * some (static) functions for which they can determine the address
+ * is never taken do not get a __cfi prefix, but *DO* get an ENDBR.
+ *
+ * As such, these functions will get sealed, but we need to be careful
+ * to not unconditionally scribble the previous function.
+ */
switch (cfi_mode) {
case CFI_FINEIBT:
/*
+ * FineIBT prefix should start with an ENDBR.
+ */
+ if (!is_endbr(addr))
+ break;
+
+ /*
* __cfi_\func:
* osp nopl (%rax)
* subl $0, %r10d
@@ -1366,12 +1389,17 @@ static void poison_cfi(void *addr)
* ud2
* 1: nop
*/
- poison_endbr(addr, false);
+ poison_endbr(addr);
poison_hash(addr + fineibt_preamble_hash);
break;
case CFI_KCFI:
/*
+ * kCFI prefix should start with a valid hash.
+ */
+ if (!decode_preamble_hash(addr))
+ break;
+ /*
* __cfi_\func:
* movl $0, %eax
* .skip 11, 0x90
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-05 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-05 11:39 [PATCH 0/8] x86: kCFI and IBT cleanups Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 11:39 ` [PATCH 1/8] x86,kcfi: Fix EXPORT_SYMBOL vs kCFI Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 14:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-05 14:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 14:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-05 14:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 15:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-05 15:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 16:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-09 9:14 ` David Laight
2024-11-05 11:39 ` [PATCH 2/8] x86/cfi: Clean up linkage Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 11:39 ` [PATCH 3/8] x86/boot: Mark start_secondary() with __noendbr Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 11:39 ` [PATCH 4/8] x86/alternative: Simplify callthunk patching Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 11:39 ` [PATCH 5/8] x86/traps: Cleanup and robustify decode_bug() Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 15:19 ` Andrew Cooper
2024-11-05 11:39 ` [PATCH 6/8] x86/ibt: Clean up is_endbr() Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-05 11:39 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2024-11-05 11:39 ` [PATCH 8/8] x86/early_printk: Harden early_serial Peter Zijlstra
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=20241105114522.514586258@infradead.org \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=alyssa.milburn@intel.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=joao@overdrivepizza.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=scott.d.constable@intel.com \
--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