lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v7 02/12] x86: Use symbol name in jump table for PIE support
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 4:20 PM Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> From: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@google.com>
>
> Replace the %c constraint with %P. The %c is incompatible with PIE
> because it implies an immediate value whereas %P reference a symbol.
> Change the _ASM_PTR reference to .long for expected relocation size and
> add a long padding to ensure entry alignment.
>
> Position Independent Executable (PIE) support will allow to extend the
> KASLR randomization range below 0xffffffff80000000.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h
> index 65191ce8e1cf..e47fad8ee632 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h
> @@ -25,9 +25,9 @@ static __always_inline bool arch_static_branch(struct static_key *key, bool bran
> ".pushsection __jump_table, \"aw\" \n\t"
> _ASM_ALIGN "\n\t"
> ".long 1b - ., %l[l_yes] - . \n\t"
> - _ASM_PTR "%c0 + %c1 - .\n\t"
> + _ASM_PTR "%P0 - .\n\t"
> ".popsection \n\t"
> - : : "i" (key), "i" (branch) : : l_yes);
> + : : "X" (&((char *)key)[branch]) : : l_yes);
>
> return false;
> l_yes:
> @@ -42,9 +42,9 @@ static __always_inline bool arch_static_branch_jump(struct static_key *key, bool
> ".pushsection __jump_table, \"aw\" \n\t"
> _ASM_ALIGN "\n\t"
> ".long 1b - ., %l[l_yes] - . \n\t"
> - _ASM_PTR "%c0 + %c1 - .\n\t"
> + _ASM_PTR "%P0 - .\n\t"
> ".popsection \n\t"
> - : : "i" (key), "i" (branch) : : l_yes);
> + : : "X" (&((char *)key)[branch]) : : l_yes);
>
> return false;
> l_yes:
> --
> 2.21.0.1020.gf2820cf01a-goog
>

Realized I forgot to address a feedback from the previous iteration on
this specific patch. Ignore it I will work to check if it can be
remove on the next iteration.


--
Thomas

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-21 01:24    [W:0.136 / U:0.464 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site