lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 07/10] x86: narrow out of bounds syscalls to sys_read under speculation
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 8:42 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> Are there any compilers that would miscompile:
>>
>> mask = 0 - (index < size);
>>
>> That might be a way to improve the assembly.
>
> Sadly, that is *very* easy to miscompile. In fact, I'd be very
> surprised indeed if any compiler worth its name wouldn't combine the
> comparison with the conditional branch it accompanies, and just turn
> that into a constant. IOW, you'd get
>
> mask = 0 - (index < size);
> if (index <= size) {
> ... use mask ..
>
> and the compiler would just turn that into
>
> if (index <= size) {
> mask = -1;
>
> and be done with it.
>
> Linus

Can you use @cc to make an asm statement that outputs both the masked
array index and the "if" condition? I can never remember the syntax,
but something like:

asm ("cmp %[limit], %[index]\n\tcmovae %[zero], %[index]" : [index]
"+" (index), "@ccb" (result));

Then you shove this into a statement expression macro so you can do:

if (index_mask_nospec(&nr, NR_syscalls)) {
... sys_call_table[nr] ..;
}

(Caveat emptor: I can also *ever* remember which way the $*!& AT&T
syntax cmp instruction goes.)

A down side is that nr actually ends up containing zero outside the
if. *That* could be avoided with jump labels.

--Andy

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-02-06 21:50    [W:0.079 / U:7.960 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site