On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 11:29:05PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 02:02:55PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 08:42:37AM +0200, Michael Fuckner wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I changed your patch slightly to apply to specialreh.h on STABLE > > > > > > root_at_c64:/root # diff smep.1.patch.bak smep.1.patch > > > 80c80 > > > < diff --git a/sys/x86/include/specialreg.h b/sys/x86/include/specialreg.h > > > --- > > > > diff --git a/sys/amd64/include/specialreg.h > > > b/sys/amd64/include/specialreg.h > > > 82,83c82,83 > > > < --- a/sys/x86/include/specialreg.h > > > < +++ b/sys/x86/include/specialreg.h > > > --- > > > > --- a/sys/amd64/include/specialreg.h > > > > +++ b/sys/amd64/include/specialreg.h > > > > > > I got a new kernel, but it is stuck immediately (kerneltrap 9 with > > > interrupts disabled), system doesn't boot on E3-1230 V2 on Supermicro > > > X9SCM-IIF > > > > > > Anything else I could check? > > I need the backtrace and the whole kernel messages. > At least, there was a typo in the definition of CR4_FSGSBASE. > I still need verbose dmesg and panic messages, if any, with the > http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/misc/smep.2.patch > version of the patch. > With a help from Andrey, who has access to the hardware supporting SMEP, I fixed the issue with double-fault on SMEP enable. The issue was due to loader(8) making a handoff to the kernel with 1GB identity mapping which has the PG_U bit set. As a result, after enabling the CR4.SMEP, the #pf was generated immediately. But since the handler, if any, is also mapped with PG_U, double-fault happen and machine was reset. Updated patch, also fixing other minor problems with the features display, is at http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/misc/smep.3.patch . Please test. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Michael! > > > > > > > > > On 09/08/2012 08:10 PM, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > >Please find at > > > >http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/misc/smep.1.patch > > > >the patch which should enable the FSGSBASE and SMEP features > > > >supposedly present in the IvyBridge CPUs. > > > > > > > >FSGSBASE are four new instructions available in the 64bit mode only. > > > >They allow to access bases for %fs and %gs without touching MSRs. > > > >This makes it possible to both read and write bases in the user mode, > > > >or in ring 0 with lower overhead. > > > > > > > >At the moment, WRFSBASE/WRGSBASE instructions should work, but are > > > >useless since any interrupt or context switch overrides bases with the > > > >values set by the arch syscall. Still, RDFSBASE/RDGSBASE might be useful > > > >for some code and I see no reason not to enable them. > > > > > > > >SMEP is the nice feature of the processor which makes it trap if ring > > > >0 tries to execute an instruction from usermode-accessible page. It is > > > >another mitigation for things like calling user-controllable function > > > >pointer in kernel, as well as a protection for NULL function pointer > > > >dereference. > > > > > > > >I am sure that we never execute anything in kernel from user page, but > > > >I did not tested the patch since I have no Ivy machine. > > > > > > > >I need your reports about boot on Ivy with patch applied. Please include > > > >the lines from verbose dmesg with CPU Features. In particular, the > > > >'Standard Extended Features' report should appear in output. > > > > > > > >Thanks. > > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:31 UTC