Re: [PATCH v10 19/20] x86/asm/efi: Create a stack frame in efi_call()
From: Matt Fleming
Date: Fri Aug 14 2015 - 05:12:27 EST
On Thu, 13 Aug, at 10:10:40PM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> efi_call() is a callable non-leaf function which doesn't honor
> CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER, which can result in bad stack traces.
>
> Create a stack frame for it when CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER is enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S
> index 86d0f9e..0df2dcc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_64.S
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> #include <asm/msr.h>
> #include <asm/processor-flags.h>
> #include <asm/page_types.h>
> +#include <asm/frame.h>
>
> #define SAVE_XMM \
> mov %rsp, %rax; \
> @@ -74,6 +75,7 @@
> .endm
>
> ENTRY(efi_call)
> + FRAME_BEGIN
> SAVE_XMM
> mov (%rsp), %rax
> mov 8(%rax), %rax
> @@ -88,6 +90,7 @@ ENTRY(efi_call)
> RESTORE_PGT
> addq $48, %rsp
> RESTORE_XMM
> + FRAME_END
> ret
> ENDPROC(efi_call)
You mention that stackvalidate will recursively validate the frame
pointers in all code paths. Since we're calling into firmware code from
efi_call(), we don't need to do anything special here right?
I'm guessing stackvalidate would just stop since it has no way of
knowing the target address of the %call instruction, but I just wanted
to check (especially since the firmware ABI is different).
Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@xxxxxxxxx>
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/