On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:37 PM, Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:57 AM, tedheadster <tedheads...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Changing X86_32_LAZY_GS to 'y' does not cause the kernel to hang.
>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 11:40:17AM -0500, tedheadster wrote:
>>>> in your patch "x86: make lazy %gs optional on x86_32" were you able
>>>> to test it on really old processors? In 4.16.0-rc1, X86_32_LAZY_GS got
>>>> toggled from 'y' to 'n' in my default config because of changes to the
>>>> stack protector code. It hangs my ancient i486 test machine right
>>>> after 'Booting the kernel'.
>>> I didn't have access to an i486 at the time or ever since, so it
>>> wasn't tested there. If this is specific to i486, flagging it so in
>>> the config probably isn't the end of the world at this point.
>> I will be able to test this on other 32bit hardware at the end of
>> the week. Hopefully I'll be able to identify which processors it does
>> not work on (i486/i586/i686).
> So, this is the exact opposite of my tests: if I had X86_32_LAZY_GS=y
> and stack protector enabled (via _AUTO), the boot would hang. This
> change solved that for me:
> config X86_32_LAZY_GS
> def_bool y
> - depends on X86_32 && !CC_STACKPROTECTOR
> + depends on X86_32 && CC_STACKPROTECTOR_NONE
> since stack-protector in _AUTO mode had to reorganize that logic. It
> seemed LAZY_GS isn't compatible with stack-protector, so I made sure
> to retain that. What are your other configs?
I am running the 4.16-rc1 release. My arch/x86/Kconfig has this logic:
depends on X86_32 && CC_STACKPROTECTOR_NONE
I get a hang on i486 when I choose any of these configuration options:
Also, CONFIG_X86_32_LAZY_GS does not appear in any of these config
files, not even as "# CONFIG_X86_32_LAZY_GS is not set", which I
thought was strange.
The only configuration that works on i486 is:
Now it gets interesting. All four of these configurations boots
successfully when compiled for, and run on, a Pentium 4 M
(CONFIG_PENTIUM4). So it certainly is related to what version of the
processor you use.
I will continue to try other configuration combinations and report back.