3.13.11-ckt32 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------ From: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> commit 19952a92037e752f9d3bbbad552d596f9a56e146 upstream. Instead of duplicating the CC_STACKPROTECTOR Kconfig and Makefile logic in each architecture, switch to using HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR and keep everything in one place. This retains the x86-specific bug verification scripts. Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> Cc: Arjan van de Ven <ar...@linux.intel.com> Cc: Michal Marek <mma...@suse.cz> Cc: Russell King <li...@arm.linux.org.uk> Cc: Ralf Baechle <r...@linux-mips.org> Cc: Paul Mundt <let...@linux-sh.org> Cc: James Hogan <james.ho...@imgtec.com> Cc: Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au> Cc: Shawn Guo <shawn....@linaro.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-m...@linux-mips.org Cc: linux-a...@vger.kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1387481759-14535-2-git-send-email-keesc...@chromium.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> [ kamal: 3.13-stable prereq for 8779657 stackprotector: Introduce CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_STRONG ] Signed-off-by: Kamal Mostafa <ka...@canonical.com> --- Makefile | 14 +++++++++++--- arch/Kconfig | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm/Kconfig | 13 +------------ arch/arm/Makefile | 4 ---- arch/mips/Kconfig | 14 +------------- arch/mips/Makefile | 4 ---- arch/sh/Kconfig | 15 +-------------- arch/sh/Makefile | 4 ---- arch/x86/Kconfig | 17 +---------------- arch/x86/Makefile | 8 +++----- 10 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-) diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 7606094..58a799e 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -597,10 +597,18 @@ ifneq ($(CONFIG_FRAME_WARN),0) KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option,-Wframe-larger-than=${CONFIG_FRAME_WARN}) endif -# Force gcc to behave correct even for buggy distributions -ifndef CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR -KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector) +# Handle stack protector mode. +ifdef CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR + stackp-flag := -fstack-protector + ifeq ($(call cc-option, $(stackp-flag)),) + $(warning Cannot use CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR: \ + -fstack-protector not supported by compiler)) + endif +else + # Force off for distro compilers that enable stack protector by default. + stackp-flag := $(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector) endif +KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(stackp-flag) # This warning generated too much noise in a regular build. # Use make W=1 to enable this warning (see scripts/Makefile.build) diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig index f1cf895..24e026d 100644 --- a/arch/Kconfig +++ b/arch/Kconfig @@ -336,6 +336,28 @@ config SECCOMP_FILTER See Documentation/prctl/seccomp_filter.txt for details. +config HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR + bool + help + An arch should select this symbol if: + - its compiler supports the -fstack-protector option + - it has implemented a stack canary (e.g. __stack_chk_guard) + +config CC_STACKPROTECTOR + bool "Enable -fstack-protector buffer overflow detection" + depends on HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR + help + This option turns on the -fstack-protector GCC feature. This + feature puts, at the beginning of functions, a canary value on + the stack just before the return address, and validates + the value just before actually returning. Stack based buffer + overflows (that need to overwrite this return address) now also + overwrite the canary, which gets detected and the attack is then + neutralized via a kernel panic. + + This feature requires gcc version 4.2 or above, or a distribution + gcc with the feature backported. + config HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING bool help diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig index b3d400d..5102fd5 100644 --- a/arch/arm/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ config ARM select HAVE_BPF_JIT select HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING select HAVE_C_RECORDMCOUNT + select HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR select HAVE_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK select HAVE_DMA_API_DEBUG select HAVE_DMA_ATTRS @@ -1859,18 +1860,6 @@ config SECCOMP and the task is only allowed to execute a few safe syscalls defined by each seccomp mode. -config CC_STACKPROTECTOR - bool "Enable -fstack-protector buffer overflow detection (EXPERIMENTAL)" - help - This option turns on the -fstack-protector GCC feature. This - feature puts, at the beginning of functions, a canary value on - the stack just before the return address, and validates - the value just before actually returning. Stack based buffer - overflows (that need to overwrite this return address) now also - overwrite the canary, which gets detected and the attack is then - neutralized via a kernel panic. - This feature requires gcc version 4.2 or above. - config SWIOTLB def_bool y diff --git a/arch/arm/Makefile b/arch/arm/Makefile index 749e88f..bc050dc 100644 --- a/arch/arm/Makefile +++ b/arch/arm/Makefile @@ -40,10 +40,6 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER),y) KBUILD_CFLAGS +=-fno-omit-frame-pointer -mapcs -mno-sched-prolog endif -ifeq ($(CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR),y) -KBUILD_CFLAGS +=-fstack-protector -endif - ifeq ($(CONFIG_CPU_BIG_ENDIAN),y) KBUILD_CPPFLAGS += -mbig-endian AS += -EB diff --git a/arch/mips/Kconfig b/arch/mips/Kconfig index 650de39..c93d92b 100644 --- a/arch/mips/Kconfig +++ b/arch/mips/Kconfig @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ config MIPS select MODULES_USE_ELF_RELA if MODULES && 64BIT select CLONE_BACKWARDS select HAVE_DEBUG_STACKOVERFLOW + select HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR menu "Machine selection" @@ -2322,19 +2323,6 @@ config SECCOMP If unsure, say Y. Only embedded should say N here. -config CC_STACKPROTECTOR - bool "Enable -fstack-protector buffer overflow detection (EXPERIMENTAL)" - help - This option turns on the -fstack-protector GCC feature. This - feature puts, at the beginning of functions, a canary value on - the stack just before the return address, and validates - the value just before actually returning. Stack based buffer - overflows (that need to overwrite this return address) now also - overwrite the canary, which gets detected and the attack is then - neutralized via a kernel panic. - - This feature requires gcc version 4.2 or above. - config USE_OF bool select OF diff --git a/arch/mips/Makefile b/arch/mips/Makefile index de300b9..efe50787 100644 --- a/arch/mips/Makefile +++ b/arch/mips/Makefile @@ -232,10 +232,6 @@ bootvars-y = VMLINUX_LOAD_ADDRESS=$(load-y) \ LDFLAGS += -m $(ld-emul) -ifdef CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR - KBUILD_CFLAGS += -fstack-protector -endif - ifdef CONFIG_MIPS CHECKFLAGS += $(shell $(CC) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS) -dM -E -x c /dev/null | \ egrep -vw '__GNUC_(|MINOR_|PATCHLEVEL_)_' | \ diff --git a/arch/sh/Kconfig b/arch/sh/Kconfig index 9b0979f..ce29831 100644 --- a/arch/sh/Kconfig +++ b/arch/sh/Kconfig @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ config SUPERH32 select PERF_EVENTS select ARCH_HIBERNATION_POSSIBLE if MMU select SPARSE_IRQ + select HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR config SUPERH64 def_bool ARCH = "sh64" @@ -695,20 +696,6 @@ config SECCOMP If unsure, say N. -config CC_STACKPROTECTOR - bool "Enable -fstack-protector buffer overflow detection (EXPERIMENTAL)" - depends on SUPERH32 - help - This option turns on the -fstack-protector GCC feature. This - feature puts, at the beginning of functions, a canary value on - the stack just before the return address, and validates - the value just before actually returning. Stack based buffer - overflows (that need to overwrite this return address) now also - overwrite the canary, which gets detected and the attack is then - neutralized via a kernel panic. - - This feature requires gcc version 4.2 or above. - config SMP bool "Symmetric multi-processing support" depends on SYS_SUPPORTS_SMP diff --git a/arch/sh/Makefile b/arch/sh/Makefile index aed701c..d4d16e4 100644 --- a/arch/sh/Makefile +++ b/arch/sh/Makefile @@ -199,10 +199,6 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_DWARF_UNWINDER),y) KBUILD_CFLAGS += -fasynchronous-unwind-tables endif -ifeq ($(CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR),y) - KBUILD_CFLAGS += -fstack-protector -endif - libs-$(CONFIG_SUPERH32) := arch/sh/lib/ $(libs-y) libs-$(CONFIG_SUPERH64) := arch/sh/lib64/ $(libs-y) diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig index 223080d..250706e 100644 --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig @@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ config X86 select HAVE_DEBUG_STACKOVERFLOW select HAVE_IRQ_EXIT_ON_IRQ_STACK if X86_64 select ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW + select HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR config INSTRUCTION_DECODER def_bool y @@ -1640,22 +1641,6 @@ config SECCOMP If unsure, say Y. Only embedded should say N here. -config CC_STACKPROTECTOR - bool "Enable -fstack-protector buffer overflow detection" - ---help--- - This option turns on the -fstack-protector GCC feature. This - feature puts, at the beginning of functions, a canary value on - the stack just before the return address, and validates - the value just before actually returning. Stack based buffer - overflows (that need to overwrite this return address) now also - overwrite the canary, which gets detected and the attack is then - neutralized via a kernel panic. - - This feature requires gcc version 4.2 or above, or a distribution - gcc with the feature backported. Older versions are automatically - detected and for those versions, this configuration option is - ignored. (and a warning is printed during bootup) - source kernel/Kconfig.hz config KEXEC diff --git a/arch/x86/Makefile b/arch/x86/Makefile index 57d0215..13b22e0 100644 --- a/arch/x86/Makefile +++ b/arch/x86/Makefile @@ -89,13 +89,11 @@ else KBUILD_CFLAGS += -maccumulate-outgoing-args endif +# Make sure compiler does not have buggy stack-protector support. ifdef CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR cc_has_sp := $(srctree)/scripts/gcc-x86_$(BITS)-has-stack-protector.sh - ifeq ($(shell $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(cc_has_sp) $(CC) $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(biarch)),y) - stackp-y := -fstack-protector - KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(stackp-y) - else - $(warning stack protector enabled but no compiler support) + ifneq ($(shell $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(cc_has_sp) $(CC) $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(biarch)),y) + $(warning stack-protector enabled but compiler support broken) endif endif -- 1.9.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
