Re: [RFC][PATCH 08/24] x86/entry: Add C version of SWAPGS and SWAPGS_UNSAFE_STACK

[Alexandre Chartre]

[Copying the reply to Andy in the thread with the right email addresses]

On 11/9/20 6:38 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:22 AM Alexandre Chartre
> <alexandre.chartre@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > SWAPGS and SWAPGS_UNSAFE_STACK are assembly macros. Add C versions
> > of these macros (swapgs() and swapgs_unsafe_stack()).
>
> This needs a very good justification.  It also needs some kind of
> static verification that these helpers are only used by noinstr code,
> and they need to be __always_inline.  And I cannot fathom how C code
> could possibly use SWAPGS_UNSAFE_STACK in a meaningful way.

You're right, I probably need to revisit the usage of SWAPGS_UNSAFE_STACK
in C code, that doesn't make sense. Looks like only SWAPGS is then needed.

Or maybe we can just use native_swapgs() instead?

I have added a C version of SWAPGS for moving paranoid_entry() to C because,
in this function, we need to switch CR3 before doing the updating GS. But I
really wonder if we need a paravirt swapgs here, and we can probably just use
native_swapgs().

Also, if we map the per cpu offsets (__per_cpu_offset) in the user page-table
then we will be able to update GS before switching CR3. That way we can keep the
GS update in assembly code, and just do the CR3 switch in C code. This would also
avoid having to disable stack-protector (patch 21).

alex.