From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: suppress KMSAN reports in arch_within_stack_frames()
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:22:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y3tRgGUKCxUoLeM8@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221118172305.3321253-1-glider@google.com>
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 06:23:05PM +0100, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> arch_within_stack_frames() performs stack walking and may confuse
> KMSAN by stepping on stale shadow values. To prevent false positive
> reports, disable KMSAN checks in this function.
>
> This fixes KMSAN's interoperability with CONFIG_HARDENED_USERCOPY.
>
> Link: https://github.com/google/kmsan/issues/89
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y3b9AAEKp2Vr3e6O@sol.localdomain/
> Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> index f0cb881c1d690..f1cccba52eb97 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> @@ -163,7 +163,12 @@ struct thread_info {
> * GOOD_FRAME if within a frame
> * BAD_STACK if placed across a frame boundary (or outside stack)
> * NOT_STACK unable to determine (no frame pointers, etc)
> + *
> + * This function reads pointers from the stack and dereferences them. The
> + * pointers may not have their KMSAN shadow set up properly, which may result
> + * in false positive reports. Disable instrumentation to avoid those.
> */
> +__no_kmsan_checks
> static inline int arch_within_stack_frames(const void * const stack,
> const void * const stackend,
> const void *obj, unsigned long len)
Seems OK; but now I'm confused as to the exact distinction between
__no_sanitize_memory and __no_kmsan_checks.
The comments there about seem to suggest __no_sanitize_memory ensures no
instrumentation at all, and __no_kmsan_checks some instrumentation but
doesn't actually check anything -- so what's left then?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-21 10:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-18 17:23 Alexander Potapenko
2022-11-21 10:22 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-11-21 10:28 ` Alexander Potapenko
2022-11-21 11:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-11-21 14:27 ` Alexander Potapenko
2022-11-22 8:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-11-30 5:40 ` Eric Biggers
2023-01-12 5:40 ` Eric Biggers
2023-01-27 16:12 ` Eric Biggers
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=Y3tRgGUKCxUoLeM8@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®