lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Oct]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 09/12] x86, mpx: decode MPX instruction to get bound violation information
> +void do_mpx_bounds(struct pt_regs *regs, siginfo_t *info,
> + struct xsave_struct *xsave_buf)
> +{
> + struct mpx_insn insn;
> + uint8_t bndregno;
> + unsigned long addr_vio;
> +
> + addr_vio = mpx_insn_decode(&insn, regs);
> +
> + bndregno = X86_MODRM_REG(insn.modrm.value);
> + if (bndregno > 3)
> + return;
> +
> + /* Note: the upper 32 bits are ignored in 32-bit mode. */
> + info->si_lower = (void __user *)(unsigned long)
> + (xsave_buf->bndregs.bndregs[2*bndregno]);
> + info->si_upper = (void __user *)(unsigned long)
> + (~xsave_buf->bndregs.bndregs[2*bndregno+1]);
> + info->si_addr_lsb = 0;
> + info->si_signo = SIGSEGV;
> + info->si_errno = 0;
> + info->si_code = SEGV_BNDERR;
> + info->si_addr = (void __user *)addr_vio;
> +}
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c b/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> index 611b6ec..b2a916b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> @@ -284,6 +284,7 @@ dotraplinkage void do_bounds(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
> unsigned long status;
> struct xsave_struct *xsave_buf;
> struct task_struct *tsk = current;
> + siginfo_t info;
>
> prev_state = exception_enter();
> if (notify_die(DIE_TRAP, "bounds", regs, error_code,
> @@ -316,6 +317,11 @@ dotraplinkage void do_bounds(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
> break;
>
> case 1: /* Bound violation. */
> + do_mpx_bounds(regs, &info, xsave_buf);
> + do_trap(X86_TRAP_BR, SIGSEGV, "bounds", regs,
> + error_code, &info);
> + break;
> +
> case 0: /* No exception caused by Intel MPX operations. */
> do_trap(X86_TRAP_BR, SIGSEGV, "bounds", regs, error_code, NULL);
> break;
>

So, siginfo is stack-allocarted here. do_mpx_bounds() can error out if
it sees an invalid bndregno. We still send the signal with the &info
whether or not we filled the 'info' in do_mpx_bounds().

Can't this leak some kernel stack out in the 'info'?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-10-31 00:21    [W:0.528 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site