From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com>, edk2-devel@lists.01.org
Cc: Dandan Bi <dandan.bi@intel.com>, Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com>,
Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>,
"Jordan Justen (Intel address)" <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
"Gao, Liming" <liming.gao@intel.com>,
Michael Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei: fix unsafe way to get stack pointer
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 18:41:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f76d9021-21eb-401a-5be3-dfadc33550f5@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180918090448.7324-1-jian.j.wang@intel.com>
Adding Jordan, Ard, Liming, Mike; comment at the bottom:
On 09/18/18 11:04, Jian J Wang wrote:
> REF: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1186
>
> This patch uses SetJump() to get the stack pointer from esp/rsp
> register to replace local variable way, which was marked by static
> code checker as an unsafe way.
>
> Cc: Dandan Bi <dandan.bi@intel.com>
> Cc: Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com>
> Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
> Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
> Signed-off-by: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com>
> ---
> UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuMpPei.h | 8 ++++++++
> UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuPaging.c | 9 +++++++--
> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuMpPei.h b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuMpPei.h
> index d097a66aa8..fe61f5e3bc 100644
> --- a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuMpPei.h
> +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuMpPei.h
> @@ -35,6 +35,14 @@
>
> extern EFI_PEI_PPI_DESCRIPTOR mPeiCpuMpPpiDesc;
>
> +#if defined (MDE_CPU_IA32)
> +#define CPU_STACK_POINTER(Context) ((Context).Esp)
> +#elif defined (MDE_CPU_X64)
> +#define CPU_STACK_POINTER(Context) ((Context).Rsp)
> +#else
> +#error CPU type not supported!
> +#endif
> +
> /**
> This service retrieves the number of logical processor in the platform
> and the number of those logical processors that are enabled on this boot.
> diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuPaging.c b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuPaging.c
> index c7e0822452..997c20c26e 100644
> --- a/UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuPaging.c
> +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/CpuPaging.c
> @@ -517,9 +517,14 @@ GetStackBase (
> IN OUT VOID *Buffer
> )
> {
> - EFI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS StackBase;
> + EFI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS StackBase;
> + BASE_LIBRARY_JUMP_BUFFER Context;
>
> - StackBase = (EFI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS)(UINTN)&StackBase;
> + //
> + // Retrieve stack pointer from current processor context.
> + //
> + SetJump (&Context);
> + StackBase = (EFI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS)CPU_STACK_POINTER (Context);
> StackBase += BASE_4KB;
> StackBase &= ~((EFI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS)BASE_4KB - 1);
> StackBase -= PcdGet32(PcdCpuApStackSize);
>
I think using SetJump() for this purpose, in contexts where library
constructors have run, is a good idea.
What I like less is that we are open-coding this trick here, in
CpuMpPei. Getting the stack pointer in C code is frequently necessary,
and I would prefer an API addition to MdePkg's BaseLib, implemented for
as many architectures as possible. One discussion that I recall about
this is the sub-thread at
<https://www.mail-archive.com/edk2-devel@lists.01.org/msg32216.html>.
If the MdePkg maintainers disagree with the BaseLib API addition, then
the patch should still be improved, if possible. Mike said earlier that
in C files we like to avoid MDE_CPU_* dependent-code, instead we extract
the affected function(s) to architecture-dependent subdirectories, and
use [Sources.<ARCH>] sections in the INF files. That suggests files like:
- UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/Ia32/GetStackBase.c
- UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei/X64/GetStackBase.c
here.
Possibly overkill, yes, but we should be consistent.
Thanks
Laszlo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-18 16:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-18 9:04 [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg/CpuMpPei: fix unsafe way to get stack pointer Jian J Wang
2018-09-18 16:41 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2018-09-19 0:46 ` Wang, Jian J
2018-09-18 18:02 ` Jordan Justen
2018-09-19 1:12 ` Wang, Jian J
2018-09-19 1:21 ` Wu, Hao A
2018-09-19 11:17 ` Laszlo Ersek
2018-09-26 2:18 ` Wang, Jian J
2018-09-26 8:30 ` Laszlo Ersek
2018-09-26 8:54 ` Wang, Jian J
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f76d9021-21eb-401a-5be3-dfadc33550f5@redhat.com \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox