lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jun]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[patch V3 2/6] x86/fpu: Invalidate FPU state after a failed XRSTOR from a user buffer
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>

Both Intel and AMD consider it to be architecturally valid for XRSTOR to
fail with #PF but nonetheless change the register state. The actual
conditions under which this might occur are unclear [1], but it seems
plausible that this might be triggered if one sibling thread unmaps a page
and invalidates the shared TLB while another sibling thread is executing
XRSTOR on the page in question.

__fpu__restore_sig() can execute XRSTOR while the hardware registers are
preserved on behalf of a different victim task (using the
fpu_fpregs_owner_ctx mechanism), and, in theory, XRSTOR could fail but
modify the registers. If this happens, then there is a window in which
__fpu__restore_sig() could schedule out and the victim task could schedule
back in without reloading its own FPU registers. This would result in part
of the FPU state that __fpu__restore_sig() was attempting to load leaking
into the victim task's user-visible state.

Invalidate preserved FPU registers on XRSTOR failure to prevent this
situation from corrupting any state.

[1] Frequent readers of the errata lists might imagine "complex
microarchitectural conditions"

Fixes: 1d731e731c4c ("x86/fpu: Add a fastpath to __fpu__restore_sig()")
Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
---
V3: Rework comment - Borislav
V2: Amend changelog - Borislav
---
arch/x86/kernel/fpu/signal.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)

--- a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/signal.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/signal.c
@@ -369,6 +369,25 @@ static int __fpu__restore_sig(void __use
fpregs_unlock();
return 0;
}
+
+ /*
+ * The above did an FPU restore operation, restricted to
+ * the user portion of the registers, and failed, but the
+ * microcode might have modified the FPU registers
+ * nevertheless.
+ *
+ * If the FPU registers do not belong to current, then
+ * invalidate the FPU register state otherwise the task might
+ * preempt current and return to user space with corrupted
+ * FPU registers.
+ *
+ * In case current owns the FPU registers then no further
+ * action is required. The fixup below will handle it
+ * correctly.
+ */
+ if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NEED_FPU_LOAD))
+ __cpu_invalidate_fpregs_state();
+
fpregs_unlock();
} else {
/*
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-06-08 16:49    [W:0.151 / U:2.528 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site