[PATCH 5.10 002/545] x86: link vdso and boot with -z noexecstack --no-warn-rwx-segments

Greg Kroah-Hartman posted 545 patches 3 years, 3 months ago
[PATCH 5.10 002/545] x86: link vdso and boot with -z noexecstack --no-warn-rwx-segments
Posted by Greg Kroah-Hartman 3 years, 3 months ago
From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>

commit ffcf9c5700e49c0aee42dcba9a12ba21338e8136 upstream.

Users of GNU ld (BFD) from binutils 2.39+ will observe multiple
instances of a new warning when linking kernels in the form:

  ld: warning: arch/x86/boot/pmjump.o: missing .note.GNU-stack section implies executable stack
  ld: NOTE: This behaviour is deprecated and will be removed in a future version of the linker
  ld: warning: arch/x86/boot/compressed/vmlinux has a LOAD segment with RWX permissions

Generally, we would like to avoid the stack being executable.  Because
there could be a need for the stack to be executable, assembler sources
have to opt-in to this security feature via explicit creation of the
.note.GNU-stack feature (which compilers create by default) or command
line flag --noexecstack.  Or we can simply tell the linker the
production of such sections is irrelevant and to link the stack as
--noexecstack.

LLVM's LLD linker defaults to -z noexecstack, so this flag isn't
strictly necessary when linking with LLD, only BFD, but it doesn't hurt
to be explicit here for all linkers IMO.  --no-warn-rwx-segments is
currently BFD specific and only available in the current latest release,
so it's wrapped in an ld-option check.

While the kernel makes extensive usage of ELF sections, it doesn't use
permissions from ELF segments.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/3af4127a-f453-4cf7-f133-a181cce06f73@kernel.dk/
Link: https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=ba951afb99912da01a6e8434126b8fac7aa75107
Link: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/57009
Reported-and-tested-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Suggested-by: Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
 arch/x86/boot/Makefile            |    2 +-
 arch/x86/boot/compressed/Makefile |    4 ++++
 arch/x86/entry/vdso/Makefile      |    2 +-
 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/x86/boot/Makefile
+++ b/arch/x86/boot/Makefile
@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ $(obj)/zoffset.h: $(obj)/compressed/vmli
 AFLAGS_header.o += -I$(objtree)/$(obj)
 $(obj)/header.o: $(obj)/zoffset.h
 
-LDFLAGS_setup.elf	:= -m elf_i386 -T
+LDFLAGS_setup.elf	:= -m elf_i386 -z noexecstack -T
 $(obj)/setup.elf: $(src)/setup.ld $(SETUP_OBJS) FORCE
 	$(call if_changed,ld)
 
--- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/Makefile
+++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/Makefile
@@ -68,6 +68,10 @@ LDFLAGS_vmlinux := -pie $(call ld-option
 ifdef CONFIG_LD_ORPHAN_WARN
 LDFLAGS_vmlinux += --orphan-handling=warn
 endif
+LDFLAGS_vmlinux += -z noexecstack
+ifeq ($(CONFIG_LD_IS_BFD),y)
+LDFLAGS_vmlinux += $(call ld-option,--no-warn-rwx-segments)
+endif
 LDFLAGS_vmlinux += -T
 
 hostprogs	:= mkpiggy
--- a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/Makefile
+++ b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/Makefile
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ quiet_cmd_vdso = VDSO    $@
 		 sh $(srctree)/$(src)/checkundef.sh '$(NM)' '$@'
 
 VDSO_LDFLAGS = -shared --hash-style=both --build-id=sha1 \
-	$(call ld-option, --eh-frame-hdr) -Bsymbolic
+	$(call ld-option, --eh-frame-hdr) -Bsymbolic -z noexecstack
 GCOV_PROFILE := n
 
 quiet_cmd_vdso_and_check = VDSO    $@
Re: [PATCH 5.10 002/545] x86: link vdso and boot with -z noexecstack --no-warn-rwx-segments
Posted by Nick Desaulniers 3 years, 3 months ago
Sorry for not reporting this sooner; been out sick all week with COVID.

On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:46 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
>
> commit ffcf9c5700e49c0aee42dcba9a12ba21338e8136 upstream.
>

<snip>

> --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/Makefile
> @@ -68,6 +68,10 @@ LDFLAGS_vmlinux := -pie $(call ld-option
>  ifdef CONFIG_LD_ORPHAN_WARN
>  LDFLAGS_vmlinux += --orphan-handling=warn
>  endif
> +LDFLAGS_vmlinux += -z noexecstack
> +ifeq ($(CONFIG_LD_IS_BFD),y)

5.10.y is missing CONFIG_LD_IS_BFD. Specifically

commit 02aff8592204 ("kbuild: check the minimum linker version in Kconfig")
which first landed in v5.12-rc1.  I'd recommend simply dropping the
`ifeq` guards; the ld-option guard will still work.  Otherwise GNU BFD
2.39 users will observe linker warnings related to rwx-segments.

Greg, do you mind dropping this patch and I'll supply a v2, or is it
too late and I should send a patch on top?

> +LDFLAGS_vmlinux += $(call ld-option,--no-warn-rwx-segments)
> +endif
>  LDFLAGS_vmlinux += -T
>
>  hostprogs      := mkpiggy

-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
Re: [PATCH 5.10 002/545] x86: link vdso and boot with -z noexecstack --no-warn-rwx-segments
Posted by Greg Kroah-Hartman 3 years, 3 months ago
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 10:13:36AM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> Sorry for not reporting this sooner; been out sick all week with COVID.
> 
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 8:46 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
> >
> > commit ffcf9c5700e49c0aee42dcba9a12ba21338e8136 upstream.
> >
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/Makefile
> > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/Makefile
> > @@ -68,6 +68,10 @@ LDFLAGS_vmlinux := -pie $(call ld-option
> >  ifdef CONFIG_LD_ORPHAN_WARN
> >  LDFLAGS_vmlinux += --orphan-handling=warn
> >  endif
> > +LDFLAGS_vmlinux += -z noexecstack
> > +ifeq ($(CONFIG_LD_IS_BFD),y)
> 
> 5.10.y is missing CONFIG_LD_IS_BFD. Specifically
> 
> commit 02aff8592204 ("kbuild: check the minimum linker version in Kconfig")
> which first landed in v5.12-rc1.  I'd recommend simply dropping the
> `ifeq` guards; the ld-option guard will still work.  Otherwise GNU BFD
> 2.39 users will observe linker warnings related to rwx-segments.
> 
> Greg, do you mind dropping this patch and I'll supply a v2, or is it
> too late and I should send a patch on top?

I've fixed it up now, thanks!

greg k-h