objtool: Validate disassembler headers in libopcodes probegrafted

commit 3f2de814c059 ("objtool: Fix libopcodes linking with static libraries")
tested for libopcodes availability by linking a test snippet with a forward
declaration of disassemble_init_for_target().

However, testing symbol linkage with an extern declaration only verifies
the presence of the library (.so/.a) and bypasses checking for development
headers (binutils-dev). On systems where libopcodes is present without
development headers installed, the probe succeeds, enabling BUILD_DISAS.
Subsequent compilation of objtool then fails:

  fatal error: 'bfd.h' file not found
    113 | #include <bfd.h>

Additionally, the probe invokes $(HOSTCC) without $(HOSTCFLAGS), ignoring
any sysroot or include flags specified for the host compiler.

Fix this by including <bfd.h> and <dis-asm.h> directly in the test snippet,
passing $(HOSTCFLAGS) so host compiler options are respected, and defining
PACKAGE="objtool" to satisfy the configuration check in <bfd.h>.

Fixes: 3f2de814c059 ("objtool: Fix libopcodes linking with static libraries")
Fixes: 436326bc525d ("objtool: fix build failure due to missing libopcodes check")
Reported-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Assisted-by: Antigravity:Gemini-Next
Signed-off-by: Ulises Mendez Martinez <umendez@google.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260904150710.2997558-1-umendez@google.com
Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>

1 files changed, 99 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/syscall-user-dispatch.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/syscall-user-dispatch.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..c1768d9e8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/syscall-user-dispatch.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+=====================
+Syscall User Dispatch
+=====================
+
+Background
+----------
+
+Compatibility layers like Wine need a way to efficiently emulate system
+calls of only a part of their process - the part that has the
+incompatible code - while being able to execute native syscalls without
+a high performance penalty on the native part of the process.  Seccomp
+falls short on this task, since it has limited support to efficiently
+filter syscalls based on memory regions, and it doesn't support removing
+filters.  Therefore a new mechanism is necessary.
+
+Syscall User Dispatch brings the filtering of the syscall dispatcher
+address back to userspace.  The application is in control of a flip
+switch, indicating the current personality of the process.  A
+multiple-personality application can then flip the switch without
+invoking the kernel, when crossing the compatibility layer API
+boundaries, to enable/disable the syscall redirection and execute
+syscalls directly (disabled) or send them to be emulated in userspace
+through a SIGSYS.
+
+The goal of this design is to provide very quick compatibility layer
+boundary crosses, which is achieved by not executing a syscall to change
+personality every time the compatibility layer executes.  Instead, a
+userspace memory region exposed to the kernel indicates the current
+personality, and the application simply modifies that variable to
+configure the mechanism.
+
+There is a relatively high cost associated with handling signals on most
+architectures, like x86, but at least for Wine, syscalls issued by
+native Windows code are currently not known to be a performance problem,
+since they are quite rare, at least for modern gaming applications.
+
+Since this mechanism is designed to capture syscalls issued by
+non-native applications, it must function on syscalls whose invocation
+ABI is completely unexpected to Linux.  Syscall User Dispatch, therefore
+doesn't rely on any of the syscall ABI to make the filtering.  It uses
+only the syscall dispatcher address and the userspace key.
+
+As the ABI of these intercepted syscalls is unknown to Linux, these
+syscalls are not instrumentable via ptrace or the syscall tracepoints.
+
+Interface
+---------
+
+A thread can setup this mechanism on supported kernels by executing the
+following prctl:
+
+  prctl(PR_SET_SYSCALL_USER_DISPATCH, <op>, <offset>, <length>, [selector])
+
+<op> is either PR_SYS_DISPATCH_EXCLUSIVE_ON/PR_SYS_DISPATCH_INCLUSIVE_ON
+or PR_SYS_DISPATCH_OFF, to enable and disable the mechanism globally for
+that thread.  When PR_SYS_DISPATCH_OFF is used, the other fields must be zero.
+
+For PR_SYS_DISPATCH_EXCLUSIVE_ON [<offset>, <offset>+<length>) delimit
+a memory region interval from which syscalls are always executed directly,
+regardless of the userspace selector.  This provides a fast path for the
+C library, which includes the most common syscall dispatchers in the native
+code applications, and also provides a way for the signal handler to return
+without triggering a nested SIGSYS on (rt\_)sigreturn.  Users of this
+interface should make sure that at least the signal trampoline code is
+included in this region. In addition, for syscalls that implement the
+trampoline code on the vDSO, that trampoline is never intercepted.
+
+For PR_SYS_DISPATCH_INCLUSIVE_ON [<offset>, <offset>+<length>) delimit
+a memory region interval from which syscalls are dispatched based on
+the userspace selector. Syscalls from outside of the range are always
+executed directly.
+
+[selector] is a pointer to a char-sized region in the process memory
+region, that provides a quick way to enable disable syscall redirection
+thread-wide, without the need to invoke the kernel directly.  selector
+can be set to SYSCALL_DISPATCH_FILTER_ALLOW or SYSCALL_DISPATCH_FILTER_BLOCK.
+Any other value should terminate the program with a SIGSYS.
+
+Additionally, a tasks syscall user dispatch configuration can be peeked
+and poked via the PTRACE_(GET|SET)_SYSCALL_USER_DISPATCH_CONFIG ptrace
+requests. This is useful for checkpoint/restart software.
+
+Security Notes
+--------------
+
+Syscall User Dispatch provides functionality for compatibility layers to
+quickly capture system calls issued by a non-native part of the
+application, while not impacting the Linux native regions of the
+process.  It is not a mechanism for sandboxing system calls, and it
+should not be seen as a security mechanism, since it is trivial for a
+malicious application to subvert the mechanism by jumping to an allowed
+dispatcher region prior to executing the syscall, or to discover the
+address and modify the selector value.  If the use case requires any
+kind of security sandboxing, Seccomp should be used instead.
+
+Any fork or exec of the existing process resets the mechanism to
+PR_SYS_DISPATCH_OFF.