Searched hist:"8754 e67ad4ac692c67ff1f99c0d07156f04ae40c" (Results 1 – 7 of 7) sorted by relevance
| /linux/arch/x86/lib/ |
| H A D | retpoline.S | diff 8754e67ad4ac692c67ff1f99c0d07156f04ae40c Sat Jun 22 06:17:21 CEST 2024 Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com> x86/its: Add support for ITS-safe indirect thunk
Due to ITS, indirect branches in the lower half of a cacheline may be
vulnerable to branch target injection attack.
Introduce ITS-safe thunks to patch indirect branches in the lower half of
cacheline with the thunk. Also thunk any eBPF generated indirect branches
in emit_indirect_jump().
Below category of indirect branches are not mitigated:
- Indirect branches in the .init section are not mitigated because they are
discarded after boot.
- Indirect branches that are explicitly marked retpoline-safe.
Note that retpoline also mitigates the indirect branches against ITS. This
is because the retpoline sequence fills an RSB entry before RET, and it
does not suffer from RSB-underflow part of the ITS.
Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
|
| /linux/arch/x86/include/asm/ |
| H A D | nospec-branch.h | diff 8754e67ad4ac692c67ff1f99c0d07156f04ae40c Sat Jun 22 06:17:21 CEST 2024 Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com> x86/its: Add support for ITS-safe indirect thunk
Due to ITS, indirect branches in the lower half of a cacheline may be
vulnerable to branch target injection attack.
Introduce ITS-safe thunks to patch indirect branches in the lower half of
cacheline with the thunk. Also thunk any eBPF generated indirect branches
in emit_indirect_jump().
Below category of indirect branches are not mitigated:
- Indirect branches in the .init section are not mitigated because they are
discarded after boot.
- Indirect branches that are explicitly marked retpoline-safe.
Note that retpoline also mitigates the indirect branches against ITS. This
is because the retpoline sequence fills an RSB entry before RET, and it
does not suffer from RSB-underflow part of the ITS.
Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
|
| H A D | cpufeatures.h | diff 8754e67ad4ac692c67ff1f99c0d07156f04ae40c Sat Jun 22 06:17:21 CEST 2024 Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com> x86/its: Add support for ITS-safe indirect thunk
Due to ITS, indirect branches in the lower half of a cacheline may be
vulnerable to branch target injection attack.
Introduce ITS-safe thunks to patch indirect branches in the lower half of
cacheline with the thunk. Also thunk any eBPF generated indirect branches
in emit_indirect_jump().
Below category of indirect branches are not mitigated:
- Indirect branches in the .init section are not mitigated because they are
discarded after boot.
- Indirect branches that are explicitly marked retpoline-safe.
Note that retpoline also mitigates the indirect branches against ITS. This
is because the retpoline sequence fills an RSB entry before RET, and it
does not suffer from RSB-underflow part of the ITS.
Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
|
| /linux/arch/x86/kernel/ |
| H A D | vmlinux.lds.S | diff 8754e67ad4ac692c67ff1f99c0d07156f04ae40c Sat Jun 22 06:17:21 CEST 2024 Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com> x86/its: Add support for ITS-safe indirect thunk
Due to ITS, indirect branches in the lower half of a cacheline may be
vulnerable to branch target injection attack.
Introduce ITS-safe thunks to patch indirect branches in the lower half of
cacheline with the thunk. Also thunk any eBPF generated indirect branches
in emit_indirect_jump().
Below category of indirect branches are not mitigated:
- Indirect branches in the .init section are not mitigated because they are
discarded after boot.
- Indirect branches that are explicitly marked retpoline-safe.
Note that retpoline also mitigates the indirect branches against ITS. This
is because the retpoline sequence fills an RSB entry before RET, and it
does not suffer from RSB-underflow part of the ITS.
Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
|
| H A D | alternative.c | diff 8754e67ad4ac692c67ff1f99c0d07156f04ae40c Sat Jun 22 06:17:21 CEST 2024 Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com> x86/its: Add support for ITS-safe indirect thunk
Due to ITS, indirect branches in the lower half of a cacheline may be
vulnerable to branch target injection attack.
Introduce ITS-safe thunks to patch indirect branches in the lower half of
cacheline with the thunk. Also thunk any eBPF generated indirect branches
in emit_indirect_jump().
Below category of indirect branches are not mitigated:
- Indirect branches in the .init section are not mitigated because they are
discarded after boot.
- Indirect branches that are explicitly marked retpoline-safe.
Note that retpoline also mitigates the indirect branches against ITS. This
is because the retpoline sequence fills an RSB entry before RET, and it
does not suffer from RSB-underflow part of the ITS.
Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
|
| /linux/arch/x86/net/ |
| H A D | bpf_jit_comp.c | diff 8754e67ad4ac692c67ff1f99c0d07156f04ae40c Sat Jun 22 06:17:21 CEST 2024 Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com> x86/its: Add support for ITS-safe indirect thunk
Due to ITS, indirect branches in the lower half of a cacheline may be
vulnerable to branch target injection attack.
Introduce ITS-safe thunks to patch indirect branches in the lower half of
cacheline with the thunk. Also thunk any eBPF generated indirect branches
in emit_indirect_jump().
Below category of indirect branches are not mitigated:
- Indirect branches in the .init section are not mitigated because they are
discarded after boot.
- Indirect branches that are explicitly marked retpoline-safe.
Note that retpoline also mitigates the indirect branches against ITS. This
is because the retpoline sequence fills an RSB entry before RET, and it
does not suffer from RSB-underflow part of the ITS.
Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
|
| /linux/arch/x86/ |
| H A D | Kconfig | diff 8754e67ad4ac692c67ff1f99c0d07156f04ae40c Sat Jun 22 06:17:21 CEST 2024 Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com> x86/its: Add support for ITS-safe indirect thunk
Due to ITS, indirect branches in the lower half of a cacheline may be
vulnerable to branch target injection attack.
Introduce ITS-safe thunks to patch indirect branches in the lower half of
cacheline with the thunk. Also thunk any eBPF generated indirect branches
in emit_indirect_jump().
Below category of indirect branches are not mitigated:
- Indirect branches in the .init section are not mitigated because they are
discarded after boot.
- Indirect branches that are explicitly marked retpoline-safe.
Note that retpoline also mitigates the indirect branches against ITS. This
is because the retpoline sequence fills an RSB entry before RET, and it
does not suffer from RSB-underflow part of the ITS.
Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@oracle.com>
|