merge main into amd-staging (llvm#1511)

Author: saiislam

bolt/include/bolt/Core/MCPlusBuilder.h

@@ -587,6 +587,41 @@ class MCPlusBuilder {
     return getNoRegister();
   }
 
+  /// Returns the register containing an address safely materialized by `Inst`
+  /// under the Pointer Authentication threat model.
+  ///
+  /// Returns the register `Inst` writes to if:
+  /// 1. the register is a materialized address, and
+  /// 2. the register has been materialized safely, i.e. cannot be attacker-
+  ///    controlled, under the Pointer Authentication threat model.
+  ///
+  /// If the instruction does not write to any register satisfying the above
+  /// two conditions, NoRegister is returned.
+  ///
+  /// The Pointer Authentication threat model assumes an attacker is able to
+  /// modify any writable memory, but not executable code (due to W^X).
+  virtual MCPhysReg
+  getMaterializedAddressRegForPtrAuth(const MCInst &Inst) const {
+    llvm_unreachable("not implemented");
+    return getNoRegister();
+  }
+
+  /// Analyzes if this instruction can safely perform address arithmetics
+  /// under Pointer Authentication threat model.
+  ///
+  /// If an (OutReg, InReg) pair is returned, then after Inst is executed,
+  /// OutReg is as trusted as InReg is.
+  ///
+  /// The arithmetic instruction is considered safe if OutReg is not attacker-
+  /// controlled, provided InReg and executable code are not. Please note that
+  /// registers other than InReg as well as the contents of memory which is
+  /// writable by the process should be considered attacker-controlled.
+  virtual std::optional<std::pair<MCPhysReg, MCPhysReg>>
+  analyzeAddressArithmeticsForPtrAuth(const MCInst &Inst) const {
+    llvm_unreachable("not implemented");
+    return std::make_pair(getNoRegister(), getNoRegister());
+  }
+
   virtual bool isTerminator(const MCInst &Inst) const;
 
   virtual bool isNoop(const MCInst &Inst) const {

bolt/include/bolt/Passes/DataflowAnalysis.h

@@ -292,14 +292,17 @@ class DataflowAnalysis {
   /// Relies on a ptr map to fetch the previous instruction and then retrieve
   /// state. WARNING: Watch out for invalidated pointers. Do not use this
   /// function if you invalidated pointers after the analysis has been completed
-  ErrorOr<const StateTy &> getStateBefore(const MCInst &Point) {
-    return getStateAt(PrevPoint[&Point]);
+  ErrorOr<const StateTy &> getStateBefore(const MCInst &Point) const {
+    auto It = PrevPoint.find(&Point);
+    if (It == PrevPoint.end())
+      return make_error_code(std::errc::result_out_of_range);
+    return getStateAt(It->getSecond());
   }
 
-  ErrorOr<const StateTy &> getStateBefore(ProgramPoint Point) {
+  ErrorOr<const StateTy &> getStateBefore(ProgramPoint Point) const {
     if (Point.isBB())
       return getStateAt(*Point.getBB());
-    return getStateAt(PrevPoint[Point.getInst()]);
+    return getStateBefore(*Point.getInst());
   }
 
   /// Remove any state annotations left by this analysis

bolt/lib/Passes/PAuthGadgetScanner.cpp

@@ -335,6 +335,49 @@ class PacRetAnalysis
     });
   }
 
+  BitVector getClobberedRegs(const MCInst &Point) const {
+    BitVector Clobbered(NumRegs, false);
+    // Assume a call can clobber all registers, including callee-saved
+    // registers. There's a good chance that callee-saved registers will be
+    // saved on the stack at some point during execution of the callee.
+    // Therefore they should also be considered as potentially modified by an
+    // attacker/written to.
+    // Also, not all functions may respect the AAPCS ABI rules about
+    // caller/callee-saved registers.
+    if (BC.MIB->isCall(Point))
+      Clobbered.set();
+    else
+      BC.MIB->getClobberedRegs(Point, Clobbered);
+    return Clobbered;
+  }
+
+  // Returns all registers that can be treated as if they are written by an
+  // authentication instruction.
+  SmallVector<MCPhysReg> getRegsMadeSafeToDeref(const MCInst &Point,
+                                                const State &Cur) const {
+    SmallVector<MCPhysReg> Regs;
+    const MCPhysReg NoReg = BC.MIB->getNoRegister();
+
+    // A signed pointer can be authenticated, or
+    ErrorOr<MCPhysReg> AutReg = BC.MIB->getAuthenticatedReg(Point);
+    if (AutReg && *AutReg != NoReg)
+      Regs.push_back(*AutReg);
+
+    // ... a safe address can be materialized, or
+    MCPhysReg NewAddrReg = BC.MIB->getMaterializedAddressRegForPtrAuth(Point);
+    if (NewAddrReg != NoReg)
+      Regs.push_back(NewAddrReg);
+
+    // ... an address can be updated in a safe manner, producing the result
+    // which is as trusted as the input address.
+    if (auto DstAndSrc = BC.MIB->analyzeAddressArithmeticsForPtrAuth(Point)) {
+      if (Cur.SafeToDerefRegs[DstAndSrc->second])
+        Regs.push_back(DstAndSrc->first);
+    }
+
+    return Regs;
+  }
+
   State computeNext(const MCInst &Point, const State &Cur) {
     PacStatePrinter P(BC);
     LLVM_DEBUG({
@@ -355,37 +398,35 @@ class PacRetAnalysis
       return State();
     }
 
+    // First, compute various properties of the instruction, taking the state
+    // before its execution into account, if necessary.
+
+    BitVector Clobbered = getClobberedRegs(Point);
+    SmallVector<MCPhysReg> NewSafeToDerefRegs =
+        getRegsMadeSafeToDeref(Point, Cur);
+
+    // Then, compute the state after this instruction is executed.
     State Next = Cur;
-    BitVector Clobbered(NumRegs, false);
-    // Assume a call can clobber all registers, including callee-saved
-    // registers. There's a good chance that callee-saved registers will be
-    // saved on the stack at some point during execution of the callee.
-    // Therefore they should also be considered as potentially modified by an
-    // attacker/written to.
-    // Also, not all functions may respect the AAPCS ABI rules about
-    // caller/callee-saved registers.
-    if (BC.MIB->isCall(Point))
-      Clobbered.set();
-    else
-      BC.MIB->getClobberedRegs(Point, Clobbered);
+
     Next.SafeToDerefRegs.reset(Clobbered);
     // Keep track of this instruction if it writes to any of the registers we
     // need to track that for:
     for (MCPhysReg Reg : RegsToTrackInstsFor.getRegisters())
       if (Clobbered[Reg])
         lastWritingInsts(Next, Reg) = {&Point};
 
-    ErrorOr<MCPhysReg> AutReg = BC.MIB->getAuthenticatedReg(Point);
-    if (AutReg && *AutReg != BC.MIB->getNoRegister()) {
-      // The sub-registers of *AutReg are also trusted now, but not its
-      // super-registers (as they retain untrusted register units).
-      BitVector AuthenticatedSubregs =
-          BC.MIB->getAliases(*AutReg, /*OnlySmaller=*/true);
-      for (MCPhysReg Reg : AuthenticatedSubregs.set_bits()) {
-        Next.SafeToDerefRegs.set(Reg);
-        if (RegsToTrackInstsFor.isTracked(Reg))
-          lastWritingInsts(Next, Reg).clear();
-      }
+    // After accounting for clobbered registers in general, override the state
+    // according to authentication and other *special cases* of clobbering.
+
+    // The sub-registers are also safe-to-dereference now, but not their
+    // super-registers (as they retain untrusted register units).
+    BitVector NewSafeSubregs(NumRegs);
+    for (MCPhysReg SafeReg : NewSafeToDerefRegs)
+      NewSafeSubregs |= BC.MIB->getAliases(SafeReg, /*OnlySmaller=*/true);
+    for (MCPhysReg Reg : NewSafeSubregs.set_bits()) {
+      Next.SafeToDerefRegs.set(Reg);
+      if (RegsToTrackInstsFor.isTracked(Reg))
+        lastWritingInsts(Next, Reg).clear();
     }
 
     LLVM_DEBUG({
@@ -402,7 +443,7 @@ class PacRetAnalysis
 public:
   std::vector<MCInstReference>
   getLastClobberingInsts(const MCInst &Inst, BinaryFunction &BF,
-                         const ArrayRef<MCPhysReg> UsedDirtyRegs) {
+                         const ArrayRef<MCPhysReg> UsedDirtyRegs) const {
     if (RegsToTrackInstsFor.empty())
       return {};
     auto MaybeState = getStateBefore(Inst);

bolt/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64MCPlusBuilder.cpp

@@ -304,6 +304,43 @@ class AArch64MCPlusBuilder : public MCPlusBuilder {
     }
   }
 
+  MCPhysReg
+  getMaterializedAddressRegForPtrAuth(const MCInst &Inst) const override {
+    switch (Inst.getOpcode()) {
+    case AArch64::ADR:
+    case AArch64::ADRP:
+      // These instructions produce an address value based on the information
+      // encoded into the instruction itself (which should reside in a read-only
+      // code memory) and the value of PC register (that is, the location of
+      // this instruction), so the produced value is not attacker-controlled.
+      return Inst.getOperand(0).getReg();
+    default:
+      return getNoRegister();
+    }
+  }
+
+  std::optional<std::pair<MCPhysReg, MCPhysReg>>
+  analyzeAddressArithmeticsForPtrAuth(const MCInst &Inst) const override {
+    switch (Inst.getOpcode()) {
+    default:
+      return std::nullopt;
+    case AArch64::ADDXri:
+    case AArch64::SUBXri:
+      // The immediate addend is encoded into the instruction itself, so it is
+      // not attacker-controlled under Pointer Authentication threat model.
+      return std::make_pair(Inst.getOperand(0).getReg(),
+                            Inst.getOperand(1).getReg());
+    case AArch64::ORRXrs:
+      // "mov Xd, Xm" is equivalent to "orr Xd, XZR, Xm, lsl #0"
+      if (Inst.getOperand(1).getReg() != AArch64::XZR ||
+          Inst.getOperand(3).getImm() != 0)
+        return std::nullopt;
+
+      return std::make_pair(Inst.getOperand(0).getReg(),
+                            Inst.getOperand(2).getReg());
+    }
+  }
+
   bool isADRP(const MCInst &Inst) const override {
     return Inst.getOpcode() == AArch64::ADRP;
   }

bolt/test/binary-analysis/AArch64/gs-pacret-autiasp.s

@@ -141,24 +141,9 @@ f_nonx30_ret_ok:
         stp     x29, x30, [sp, #-16]!
         mov     x29, sp
         bl      g
-        add     x0, x0, #3
         ldp     x29, x30, [sp], #16
-        // FIXME: Should the scanner understand that an authenticated register (below x30,
-        //        after the autiasp instruction), is OK to be moved to another register
-        //        and then that register being used to return?
-        //        This respects that pac-ret hardening intent, but the scanner currently
-        //        will produce a false positive for this.
-        //        Is it worthwhile to make the scanner more complex for this case?
-        //        So far, scanning many millions of instructions across a linux distro,
-        //        I haven't encountered such an example.
-        //        The ".if 0" block below tests this case and currently fails.
-.if 0
         autiasp
         mov     x16, x30
-.else
-        mov     x16, x30
-        autia   x16, sp
-.endif
 // CHECK-NOT: function f_nonx30_ret_ok
         ret     x16
         .size f_nonx30_ret_ok, .-f_nonx30_ret_ok