From: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] objtool/x86: objtool can confuse memory and stack access
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 14:22:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e95bd083-3501-465e-be48-aa8d37f4f55d@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240329013932.vxqzc74szrckxqdq@treble>
On 3/29/24 02:39, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 02:46:34PM +0100, Alexandre Chartre wrote:
>> The encoding of an x86 instruction can include a ModR/M and a SIB
>> (Scale-Index-Base) byte to describe the addressing mode of the
>> instruction.
>>
>> objtool processes all addressing mode with a SIB base of 5 as having
>> %rbp as the base register. However, a SIB base of 5 means that the
>> effective address has either no base (if ModR/M mod is zero) or %rbp
>> as the base (if ModR/M mod is 1 or 2). This can cause objtool to confuse
>> an absolute address access with a stack operation.
>>
>> For example, objtool will see the following instruction:
>>
>> 4c 8b 24 25 e0 ff ff mov 0xffffffffffffffe0,%r12
>>
>> as a stack operation (i.e. similar to: mov -0x20(%rbp), %r12).
>>
>> [Note that this kind of weird absolute address access is added by the
>> compiler when using KASAN.]
>>
>> If this perceived stack operation happens to reference the location
>> where %r12 was pushed on the stack then the objtool validation will
>> think that %r12 is being restored and this can cause a stack state
>> mismatch.
>>
>> This kind behavior was seen on xfs code, after a minor change (convert
>> kmem_alloc() to kmalloc()):
>>
>>>> fs/xfs/xfs.o: warning: objtool: xfs_da_grow_inode_int+0x6c1: stack state mismatch: reg1[12]=-2-48 reg2[12]=-1+0
>>
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202402220435.MGN0EV6l-lkp@intel.com/
>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
>
> Nice, thanks for finding and debugging this.
>
> Would it make sense to make the check more generic by putting it into
> rm_is()?
>
Yes. Making the change.
Thanks,
alex.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-29 13:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-28 13:46 Alexandre Chartre
2024-03-29 1:39 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2024-03-29 13:22 ` Alexandre Chartre [this message]
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=e95bd083-3501-465e-be48-aa8d37f4f55d@oracle.com \
--to=alexandre.chartre@oracle.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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®