lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/20] objtool: UACCESS validation v3
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:29:17AM -0800, hpa@zytor.com wrote:
> On March 7, 2019 9:18:29 AM PST, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 09:04:36AM -0800, hpa@zytor.com wrote:
> >> On March 7, 2019 8:47:05 AM PST, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
> >wrote:
> >> >On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 02:13:12PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 01:55:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> >> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 01:03:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > > 01be 20d3: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax
> >> >> > > 01c0 20d5: 4c 39 eb cmp %r13,%rbx
> >> >> > > 01c3 20d8: 77 08 ja 20e2
> >> ><__do_sys_waitid+0x1cd>
> >> >>
> >> >> randconfig-build/kernel/exit.o: warning: objtool:
> >> >__do_sys_waitid()+0x1c3: (branch)
> >> >>
> >> >> > > 01cd 20e2: 83 f0 01 xor $0x1,%eax
> >> >> > > 01d0 20e5: 48 89 c2 mov %rax,%rdx
> >> >> > > 01d3 20e8: 83 e2 01 and $0x1,%edx
> >> >> > > 01d6 20eb: 48 83 c2 02 add $0x2,%rdx
> >> >> > > 01da 20ef: 48 ff 04 d5 00 00 00 incq 0x0(,%rdx,8)
> >> >> > > 01e1 20f6: 00
> >> >> > > 01de 20f3: R_X86_64_32S _ftrace_branch+0x148
> >> >> > > 01e2 20f7: 84 c0 test %al,%al
> >> >> > > 01e4 20f9: 75 2d jne 2128
> >> ><__do_sys_waitid+0x213>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > we do not take this branch and fall-through.
> >> >>
> >> >> And that is the error, I think. We should've taken it and went to:
> >> >>
> >> >> return -EFAULT;
> >> >>
> >> >> because:
> >> >>
> >> >> +1be xor %eax,%eax eax=0
> >> >> +1cd xor $0x1,%eax eax=1
> >> >> +1e2 test %al,%al 1&1==1 -> ZF=0
> >> >> +1e4 jnz
> >> >>
> >> >> Is an unconditional code sequence, but there's no way objtool can
> >do
> >> >> that without becoming a full blown interpreter :/
> >> >>
> >> >> > > 0213 2128: 49 c7 c7 f2 ff ff ff mov
> >> >$0xfffffffffffffff2,%r15
> >> >> > > ffffffffffffe0eb }
> >> >> > > 021a 212f: 48 8d 65 d8 lea
> >-0x28(%rbp),%rsp
> >> >> > > 021e 2133: 4c 89 f8 mov %r15,%rax
> >> >> > > 0221 2136: 5b pop %rbx
> >> >> > > 0222 2137: 41 5c pop %r12
> >> >> > > 0224 2139: 41 5d pop %r13
> >> >> > > 0226 213b: 41 5e pop %r14
> >> >> > > 0228 213d: 41 5f pop %r15
> >> >> > > 022a 213f: 5d pop %rbp
> >> >> > > 022b 2140: c3 retq
> >> >
> >> >This "fixes" it, and also seems to help -Os make much code:
> >> >
> >> >diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
> >> >index 445348facea9..8de63db58fdd 100644
> >> >--- a/include/linux/compiler.h
> >> >+++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
> >> >@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ void ftrace_likely_update(struct
> >ftrace_likely_data
> >> >*f, int val,
> >> > .line = __LINE__, \
> >> > }; \
> >> > ______r = !!(cond); \
> >> >- ______f.miss_hit[______r]++; \
> >> >+ if (______r) ______f.miss_hit[1]++; else ______f.miss_hit[0]++; \
> >> > ______r; \
> >> > }))
> >> > #endif /* CONFIG_PROFILE_ALL_BRANCHES */
> >>
> >> if (cond)? Or is ___r used elsewhere?
> >
> >______r is also the return value. And it's needed because cond should
> >only be evaluated once.
>
> So put a true; and false; inside the if.

Is that possible to do in a C macro? Doesn't seem to work for me...

--
Josh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-03-07 18:48    [W:0.450 / U:0.412 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site