kbuild: rust: keep Rust objects out of Clang LTO with inline helpersgrafted

Under `CONFIG_LTO_CLANG` + `CONFIG_RUST_INLINE_HELPERS`, one may hit
`objtool` errors such as:

    vmlinux.o: error: objtool: _R..._3Gsp4boot+0xd6a:
    can't find jump dest instruction at .text._R..._3Gsp4boot+0x1dfd

The reason is that in such builds, the Clang invocation that compiles
the combined Rust plus helpers bitcode emits LLVM bitcode (again) --
the final code generation happens in the linker's LTO step, which the
`-mllvm` trap options passed to Clang do not reach.

This, in turn, means that unreachable traps are missing, and the
impossible paths do not merely fallthrough to the next symbol, but past
the end of their own section, since LTO builds place each function in
its own section.

Thus filter `CC_FLAGS_LTO` out of the Clang invocation, so that it always
emits machine code directly, with the traps in place.

Assisted-by: LLM
Cc: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>
Cc: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
Cc: Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@google.com>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: 3a2486cc1da5 ("kbuild: rust: provide an option to inline C helpers into Rust")
Acked-by: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260816133233.197500-2-ojeda@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>

1 files changed, 86 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/mfd_noexec.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/mfd_noexec.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..7afcc480e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/mfd_noexec.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+==================================
+Introduction of non-executable mfd
+==================================
+:Author:
+    Daniel Verkamp <dverkamp@chromium.org>
+    Jeff Xu <jeffxu@chromium.org>
+
+:Contributor:
+	Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
+
+Since Linux introduced the memfd feature, memfds have always had their
+execute bit set, and the memfd_create() syscall doesn't allow setting
+it differently.
+
+However, in a secure-by-default system, such as ChromeOS, (where all
+executables should come from the rootfs, which is protected by verified
+boot), this executable nature of memfd opens a door for NoExec bypass
+and enables “confused deputy attack”.  E.g, in VRP bug [1]: cros_vm
+process created a memfd to share the content with an external process,
+however the memfd is overwritten and used for executing arbitrary code
+and root escalation. [2] lists more VRP of this kind.
+
+On the other hand, executable memfd has its legit use: runc uses memfd’s
+seal and executable feature to copy the contents of the binary then
+execute them. For such a system, we need a solution to differentiate runc's
+use of executable memfds and an attacker's [3].
+
+To address those above:
+ - Let memfd_create() set X bit at creation time.
+ - Let memfd be sealed for modifying X bit when NX is set.
+ - Add a new pid namespace sysctl: vm.memfd_noexec to help applications in
+   migrating and enforcing non-executable MFD.
+
+User API
+========
+``int memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags)``
+
+``MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL``
+	When MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL bit is set in the ``flags``, memfd is created
+	with NX. F_SEAL_EXEC is set and the memfd can't be modified to
+	add X later. MFD_ALLOW_SEALING is also implied.
+	This is the most common case for the application to use memfd.
+
+``MFD_EXEC``
+	When MFD_EXEC bit is set in the ``flags``, memfd is created with X.
+
+Note:
+	``MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL`` implies ``MFD_ALLOW_SEALING``. In case that
+	an app doesn't want sealing, it can add F_SEAL_SEAL after creation.
+
+
+Sysctl:
+========
+``pid namespaced sysctl vm.memfd_noexec``
+
+The new pid namespaced sysctl vm.memfd_noexec has 3 values:
+
+ - 0: MEMFD_NOEXEC_SCOPE_EXEC
+	memfd_create() without MFD_EXEC nor MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL acts like
+	MFD_EXEC was set.
+
+ - 1: MEMFD_NOEXEC_SCOPE_NOEXEC_SEAL
+	memfd_create() without MFD_EXEC nor MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL acts like
+	MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL was set.
+
+ - 2: MEMFD_NOEXEC_SCOPE_NOEXEC_ENFORCED
+	memfd_create() without MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL will be rejected.
+
+The sysctl allows finer control of memfd_create for old software that
+doesn't set the executable bit; for example, a container with
+vm.memfd_noexec=1 means the old software will create non-executable memfd
+by default while new software can create executable memfd by setting
+MFD_EXEC.
+
+The value of vm.memfd_noexec is passed to child namespace at creation
+time. In addition, the setting is hierarchical, i.e. during memfd_create,
+we will search from current ns to root ns and use the most restrictive
+setting.
+
+[1] https://crbug.com/1305267
+
+[2] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=type%3Dbug-security%20memfd%20escalation&can=1
+
+[3] https://lwn.net/Articles/781013/