lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 07/39] x86/cet: Add user control-protection fault handler
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 03:29:04PM -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> [...]
> -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT
> +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT) || defined(CONFIG_X86_SHADOW_STACK)

This pattern is repeated several times. Perhaps there needs to be a
CONFIG_X86_CET to make this more readable? Really just a style question.

diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
index b68eb75887b8..6cb52616e0cf 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -1836,6 +1836,11 @@ config CC_HAS_IBT
(CC_IS_CLANG && CLANG_VERSION >= 140000)) && \
$(as-instr,endbr64)

+config X86_CET
+ def_bool n
+ help
+ CET features are enabled (IBT and/or Shadow Stack)
+
config X86_KERNEL_IBT
prompt "Indirect Branch Tracking"
bool
@@ -1843,6 +1848,7 @@ config X86_KERNEL_IBT
# https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/9d7001eba9c4cb311e03cd8cdc231f9e579f2d0f
depends on !LD_IS_LLD || LLD_VERSION >= 140000
select OBJTOOL
+ select X86_CET
help
Build the kernel with support for Indirect Branch Tracking, a
hardware support course-grain forward-edge Control Flow Integrity
@@ -1945,6 +1951,7 @@ config X86_SHADOW_STACK
def_bool n
depends on ARCH_HAS_SHADOW_STACK
select ARCH_USES_HIGH_VMA_FLAGS
+ select X86_CET
help
Shadow Stack protection is a hardware feature that detects function
return address corruption. Today the kernel's support is limited to
> [...]
> +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT) || defined(CONFIG_X86_SHADOW_STACK)
> +DEFINE_IDTENTRY_ERRORCODE(exc_control_protection)
> +{
> + if (!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_IBT) &&
> + !cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_SHSTK)) {
> + pr_err("Unexpected #CP\n");
> + BUG();
> + }

I second Kirill's question here. This seems an entirely survivable
(but highly unexpected) state. I think this whole "if" could just be
replaced with:

WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_IBT) &&
!cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_SHSTK),
"Unexpected #CP\n");

Otherwise this looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>

--
Kees Cook

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-10-03 20:05    [W:1.991 / U:0.468 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site