Re: [PATCH v2] x86: Stop relying on magic jmp behavior for early_idt_handlers

[Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>]

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/segment.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/segment.h
>> @@ -231,9 +231,17 @@
>>  #define TLS_SIZE                     (GDT_ENTRY_TLS_ENTRIES* 8)
>>
>>  #ifdef __KERNEL__
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * early_idt_handlers is an array of entry points.  For simplicity, it's
>> + * a real array.  We allocate nine bytes for each entry: two one-byte
>> + * push instructions and a five-byte jump in the worst case.
>> + */
>> +#define EARLY_IDT_HANDLER_STRIDE 9
>
> So how come that two plus five equals nine? ;-)

A "one-byte push" would be pretty impressive :)

>
> It's two two-bype pushes (sometimes a 2-byte NOP), plus a 5-byte jump,
> in the worst case.
>
> I'd also mention that it's an array of 32 small trampolines that set
> up parameters and jump to a common entry point.

Will do.

>
>> +/* Build the early_idt_handlers array */
>>  ENTRY(early_idt_handlers)
>
> Please rename the function accordingly: early_idt_handlers_array, to
> make clear this is never jumped to directly, only through the IDT.

Makes sense.

>
>>       # 36(%esp) %eflags
>>       # 32(%esp) %cs
>> @@ -531,19 +532,18 @@ ENTRY(early_idt_handlers)
>>       # 24(%rsp) error code
>>       i = 0
>>       .rept NUM_EXCEPTION_VECTORS
>> -     .if (EXCEPTION_ERRCODE_MASK >> i) & 1
>> -     ASM_NOP2
>> -     .else
>> +     .fill early_idt_handlers + i * EARLY_IDT_HANDLER_STRIDE - ., 1, 0xcc
>> +     .ifeq (EXCEPTION_ERRCODE_MASK >> i) & 1
>>       pushl $0                # Dummy error code, to make stack frame uniform
>>       .endif
>>       pushl $i                # 20(%esp) Vector number
>>       jmp early_idt_handler
>>       i = i + 1
>>       .endr
>> +     .fill early_idt_handlers + i * EARLY_IDT_HANDLER_STRIDE - ., 1, 0xcc
>>  ENDPROC(early_idt_handlers)
>>
>> -     /* This is global to keep gas from relaxing the jumps */
>> -ENTRY(early_idt_handler)
>> +early_idt_handler:
>
> Please rename this as well to make it clearer what's happening,
> something like:
>
>    early_idt_handler_common:
>
> would work for me.
>
> Ditto for the 64-bit side.

Sounds good.  I'll do all this tomorrow and resend.

--Andy