[PATCH v4 7/8] ARM: hw_breakpoint: Handle CFI breakpoints

[Kees Cook]

On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 09:19:30AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> This registers a breakpoint handler for the new breakpoint type
> (0x03) inserted by LLVM CLANG for CFI breakpoints.
> 
> If we are in permissive mode, just print a backtrace and continue.
> 
> Example with CONFIG_CFI_PERMISSIVE enabled:
> 
> > echo CFI_FORWARD_PROTO > /sys/kernel/debug/provoke-crash/DIRECT
> lkdtm: Performing direct entry CFI_FORWARD_PROTO
> lkdtm: Calling matched prototype ...
> lkdtm: Calling mismatched prototype ...
> CFI failure at lkdtm_indirect_call+0x40/0x4c (target: 0x0; expected type: 0x00000000)
> WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 112 at lkdtm_indirect_call+0x40/0x4c
> CPU: 1 PID: 112 Comm: sh Not tainted 6.8.0-rc1+ #150
> Hardware name: ARM-Versatile Express
> (...)
> lkdtm: FAIL: survived mismatched prototype function call!
> lkdtm: Unexpected! This kernel (6.8.0-rc1+ armv7l) was built with CONFIG_CFI_CLANG=y
> 
> As you can see the LKDTM test fails, but I expect that this would be
> expected behaviour in the permissive mode.
> 
> We are currently not implementing target and type for the CFI
> breakpoint as this requires additional operand bundling compiler
> extensions.
> 
> CPUs without breakpoint support cannot handle breakpoints naturally,
> in these cases the permissive mode will not work, CFI will fall over
> on an undefined instruction:
> 
> Internal error: Oops - undefined instruction: 0 [#1] PREEMPT ARM
> CPU: 0 PID: 186 Comm: ash Tainted: G        W          6.9.0-rc1+ #7
> Hardware name: Gemini (Device Tree)
> PC is at lkdtm_indirect_call+0x38/0x4c
> LR is at lkdtm_CFI_FORWARD_PROTO+0x30/0x6c
> 
> This is reasonable I think: it's the best CFI can do to ascertain
> the the control flow is not broken on these CPUs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij at linaro.org>

Thanks for making this "fail closed". Looks good!

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org>

-- 
Kees Cook