public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
	Bernd Schmidt <bernds@codesourcery.com>,
	       gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,
	Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com>
Subject: Re: [x32] PATCH: Remove ix86_promote_function_mode
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 01:15:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0ac1c397-c436-40c5-98dd-4247dcd28311@email.android.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DFFE3BF.9080605@redhat.com>

Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote:

>On 06/20/2011 04:39 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> sys_foo:
>> 	cmpl	$10, %edi
>> 	jae	.L1
>> 
>> 	movq	foo_table(,%rdi,3), %rax
>> 	retq
>> .L1:
>> 	movq	$-EINVAL, %rax
>> 	retq
>> 
>> Enter this function with a non-normalized %rdi and you have a
>security
>> hole even though the C is perfectly fine.
>
>Yes, I get that.  Isn't it already the case that x86_64 defines the
>upper half of 32-bit inputs as garbage?  Assuming you're never
>intending
>to run an x32 kernel, but always an x32 environment within an x86_64
>kernel, where does the talk of security holes wrt non-pointers come
>from?
>
>
>r~

H.J. was proposing an ABI change.  I wanted to explain that the current ABI is the way it is for a reason.  x32 pointers, however, can and should be zero-extended since they will be 64 bits in the kernel, as you correctly point out.
-- 
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse my brevity and lack of formatting.

      reply	other threads:[~2011-06-21  1:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-20 13:55 H.J. Lu
2011-06-20 13:57 ` Bernd Schmidt
2011-06-20 14:13   ` H.J. Lu
2011-06-20 14:41     ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-06-20 14:44       ` Jeff Law
2011-06-20 15:11         ` H.J. Lu
2011-06-20 14:46       ` H.J. Lu
2011-06-20 15:28         ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-06-20 22:58       ` Richard Henderson
2011-06-21  0:33         ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-06-21  0:34           ` Richard Henderson
2011-06-21  1:15             ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=0ac1c397-c436-40c5-98dd-4247dcd28311@email.android.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=bernds@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=ebotcazou@adacore.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=rth@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).