On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 11:21:16PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 23:06, Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 04:59:39PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 16:52, Will Deacon <w...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:58:15PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > > > > We don't want to depend on the linker's orphan section placement > > > > > heuristics as these can vary between linkers, and may change between > > > > > versions. All sections need to be explicitly named in the linker > > > > > script. > > > > > > > > > > Explicitly include debug sections when they're present. Add .eh_frame* > > > > > to discard as it seems that these are still generated even though > > > > > -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables is being specified. Add .plt and > > > > > .data.rel.ro to discards as they are not actually used. Add .got.plt > > > > > to the image as it does appear to be mapped near .data. Finally enable > > > > > orphan section warnings. > > > > > > > > Can you elaborate a bit on what .got.plt is being used for, please? I > > > > wonder if there's an interaction with an erratum workaround in the > > > > linker > > > > or something. > > > > > > > > > > .got.plt is not used at all, but it has three magic entries at the > > > start that the dynamic linker uses for lazy dispatch, so it turns up > > > as a non-empty section of 0x18 bytes. > > > > Is there a way to suppress the generation? I haven't found a way, so I'd > > left it as-is. > > > > Not really. What we could do is assert that it is empty, and emit it > as info, so the 24 bytes are not emitted into the image. > > > This change > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S > index 6827da7f3aa5..9e13b371559f 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S > @@ -244,6 +244,9 @@ SECTIONS > __pecoff_data_size = ABSOLUTE(. - __initdata_begin); > _end = .; > > + .got.plt (INFO) : { *(.got.plt) } > + ASSERT(SIZEOF(.got.plt) == 0 || SIZEOF(.got.plt) == 0x18, > ".got.plt not empty") > +
Oh yes, I like that. I will do so. > STABS_DEBUG > > HEAD_SYMBOLS > > results in > > [28] .bss NOBITS ffff800010d71000 00d70200 > 0000000000084120 0000000000000000 WA 0 0 4096 > [29] .got.plt PROGBITS ffff800010e00000 00d70200 > 0000000000000018 0000000000000008 W 0 0 8 > [30] .comment PROGBITS 0000000000000000 00d70218 > 000000000000001c 0000000000000001 MS 0 0 1 > > in the ELF output, so it will be emitted from the image, unless it > actually have any entries, in which case we fail the build. > > > > > > We should be able to discard it afaict, but given that it does not > > > actually take up any space, it doesn't really matter either way. > > > > I will add it to the discards then. > > > > That would prevent us from doing the assert on its size, so i think > the above is more suitable in this case > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Makefile b/arch/arm64/Makefile > > > > > index a0d94d063fa8..3e628983445a 100644 > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/Makefile > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/Makefile > > > > > @@ -29,6 +29,10 @@ LDFLAGS_vmlinux += --fix-cortex-a53-843419 > > > > > endif > > > > > endif > > > > > > > > > > +# We never want expected sections to be placed heuristically by the > > > > > +# linker. All sections should be explicitly named in the linker > > > > > script. > > > > > +LDFLAGS_vmlinux += --orphan-handling=warn > > > > > + > > > > > ifeq ($(CONFIG_ARM64_USE_LSE_ATOMICS), y) > > > > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_ARM64_LSE_ATOMICS), y) > > > > > $(warning LSE atomics not supported by binutils) > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S > > > > > b/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S > > > > > index 5427f502c3a6..c9ecb3b2007d 100644 > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S > > > > > @@ -94,7 +94,8 @@ SECTIONS > > > > > /DISCARD/ : { > > > > > *(.interp .dynamic) > > > > > *(.dynsym .dynstr .hash .gnu.hash) > > > > > - *(.eh_frame) > > > > > + *(.plt) *(.data.rel.ro) > > > > > + *(.eh_frame) *(.init.eh_frame) > > > > > > > > Do we need to include .eh_frame_hdr here too? > > > > > > It would be better to build with -fno-unwind-tables, in which case > > > these sections should not even exist. > > > > Nothing seems to help with the .eh_frame issue > > (even with -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables and -fno-unwind-tables): > > > > $ aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -Wp,-MMD,arch/arm64/kernel/.smccc-call.o.d \ > > -nostdinc -isystem /usr/lib/gcc-cross/aarch64-linux-gnu/9/include \ > > -I./arch/arm64/include -I./arch/arm64/include/generated -I./include \ > > -I./arch/arm64/include/uapi -I./arch/arm64/include/generated/uapi \ > > -I./include/uapi -I./include/generated/uapi -include \ > > ./include/linux/kconfig.h -D__KERNEL__ -mlittle-endian \ > > -DCC_USING_PATCHABLE_FUNCTION_ENTRY -DKASAN_SHADOW_SCALE_SHIFT=3 \ > > -D__ASSEMBLY__ -fno-PIE -mabi=lp64 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables \ > > -fno-unwind-tables -DKASAN_SHADOW_SCALE_SHIFT=3 -Wa,-gdwarf-2 -c -o \ > > arch/arm64/kernel/smccc-call.o arch/arm64/kernel/smccc-call.S > > > > $ readelf -S arch/arm64/kernel/smccc-call.o | grep eh_frame > > [17] .eh_frame PROGBITS 0000000000000000 000001f0 > > [18] .rela.eh_frame RELA 0000000000000000 00000618 > > > > That is because that file has CFI annotations which it doesn't need > (since we don't unwind data). Oh no, another TLA collision. ;) "Call Frame Information". Nice find. I will fix this as you've suggested too. > The below should fix that - I guess this may have been inherited from > 32-bit ARM, where we do use unwind data in the kernel? > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smccc-call.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/smccc-call.S > index 1f93809528a4..d62447964ed9 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smccc-call.S > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smccc-call.S > @@ -9,7 +9,6 @@ > #include <asm/assembler.h> > > .macro SMCCC instr > - .cfi_startproc > \instr #0 > ldr x4, [sp] > stp x0, x1, [x4, #ARM_SMCCC_RES_X0_OFFS] > @@ -21,7 +20,6 @@ > b.ne 1f > str x6, [x4, ARM_SMCCC_QUIRK_STATE_OFFS] > 1: ret > - .cfi_endproc > .endm -- Kees Cook