[lkml]   [2017]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: x86-64: Maintain 16-byte stack alignment
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Herbert Xu
<> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 09:05:28AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure we have random asm code that may not maintain a
>> 16-byte stack alignment when it calls other code (including, in some
>> cases, calling C code).
>> So I'm not at all convinced that this is a good idea. We shouldn't
>> expect 16-byte alignment to be something trustworthy.
> So what if we audited all the x86 assembly code to fix this? Would
> it then be acceptable to do a 16-byte aligned stack?
> On the face of it it doesn't seem to be a huge amount of code
> assuming they mostly live under arch/x86.

The problem is that we have nasties like TRACE_IRQS_OFF. Performance
doesn't really matter for these macros, so we could probably rig up a
helper for forcibly align the stack there. Maybe
FRAME_BEGIN_FORCE_ALIGN? I also think I'd rather not to modify
pt_regs. We should just fix the small number of code paths that
create a pt_regs and then call into C code to align the stack.

But if we can't do this with automatic verification, then I'm not sure
I want to do it at all. The asm is already more precarious than I'd
like, and having a code path that is misaligned is asking for obscure
bugs down the road.


 \ /
  Last update: 2017-01-12 08:52    [W:0.101 / U:1.020 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site