From 4261a2e8b45de5d9a486f7402174c1816f884c11 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mark Rutland Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 18:31:16 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] arm64: stackleak: fix current_top_of_stack() [ Upstream commit e85094c31ddb794ac41c299a5a7a68243148f829 ] Due to some historical confusion, arm64's current_top_of_stack() isn't what the stackleak code expects. This could in theory result in a number of problems, and practically results in an unnecessary performance hit. We can avoid this by aligning the arm64 implementation with the x86 implementation. The arm64 implementation of current_top_of_stack() was added specifically for stackleak in commit: 0b3e336601b82c6a ("arm64: Add support for STACKLEAK gcc plugin") This was intended to be equivalent to the x86 implementation, but the implementation, semantics, and performance characteristics differ wildly: * On x86, current_top_of_stack() returns the top of the current task's task stack, regardless of which stack is in active use. The implementation accesses a percpu variable which the x86 entry code maintains, and returns the location immediately above the pt_regs on the task stack (above which x86 has some padding). * On arm64 current_top_of_stack() returns the top of the stack in active use (i.e. the one which is currently being used). The implementation checks the SP against a number of potentially-accessible stacks, and will BUG() if no stack is found. The core stackleak_erase() code determines the upper bound of stack to erase with: | if (on_thread_stack()) | boundary = current_stack_pointer; | else | boundary = current_top_of_stack(); On arm64 stackleak_erase() is always called on a task stack, and on_thread_stack() should always be true. On x86, stackleak_erase() is mostly called on a trampoline stack, and is sometimes called on a task stack. Currently, this results in a lot of unnecessary code being generated for arm64 for the impossible !on_thread_stack() case. Some of this is inlined, bloating stackleak_erase(), while portions of this are left out-of-line and permitted to be instrumented (which would be a functional problem if that code were reachable). As a first step towards improving this, this patch aligns arm64's implementation of current_top_of_stack() with x86's, always returning the top of the current task's stack. With GCC 11.1.0 this results in the bulk of the unnecessary code being removed, including all of the out-of-line instrumentable code. While I don't believe there's a functional problem in practice I've marked this as a fix since the semantic was clearly wrong, the fix itself is simple, and other code might rely upon this in future. Fixes: 0b3e336601b82c6a ("arm64: Add support for STACKLEAK gcc plugin") Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland Cc: Alexander Popov Cc: Andrew Morton Cc: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Catalin Marinas Cc: Kees Cook Cc: Will Deacon Acked-by: Catalin Marinas Signed-off-by: Kees Cook Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220427173128.2603085-2-mark.rutland@arm.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h | 10 ++++------ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h index 6f41b65f9962..25c0bb5b8faa 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h @@ -380,12 +380,10 @@ long get_tagged_addr_ctrl(struct task_struct *task); * of header definitions for the use of task_stack_page. */ -#define current_top_of_stack() \ -({ \ - struct stack_info _info; \ - BUG_ON(!on_accessible_stack(current, current_stack_pointer, 1, &_info)); \ - _info.high; \ -}) +/* + * The top of the current task's task stack + */ +#define current_top_of_stack() ((unsigned long)current->stack + THREAD_SIZE) #define on_thread_stack() (on_task_stack(current, current_stack_pointer, 1, NULL)) #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */