From 5febf432df1cfa5b25d99b54c32103fafbdd0eb9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Miguel Ojeda Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 15:32:33 +0200 Subject: kbuild: rust: keep Rust objects out of Clang LTO with inline helpers 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 Cc: Boqun Feng Cc: Alice Ryhl Cc: Matthew Maurer Cc: Josh Poimboeuf Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 3a2486cc1da5 ("kbuild: rust: provide an option to inline C helpers into Rust") Acked-by: Gary Guo Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260816133233.197500-2-ojeda@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda --- fs/tests/exec_kunit.c | 132 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 132 insertions(+) create mode 100644 fs/tests/exec_kunit.c (limited to 'fs/tests/exec_kunit.c') diff --git a/fs/tests/exec_kunit.c b/fs/tests/exec_kunit.c new file mode 100644 index 000000000..1c32cac09 --- /dev/null +++ b/fs/tests/exec_kunit.c @@ -0,0 +1,132 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only +#include + +struct bprm_stack_limits_result { + struct linux_binprm bprm; + int expected_rc; + unsigned long expected_argmin; +}; + +static const struct bprm_stack_limits_result bprm_stack_limits_results[] = { + /* Negative argc/envc counts produce -E2BIG */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ULONG_MAX, + .argc = INT_MIN, .envc = INT_MIN }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ULONG_MAX, + .argc = 5, .envc = -1 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ULONG_MAX, + .argc = -1, .envc = 10 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + /* The max value of argc or envc is MAX_ARG_STRINGS. */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ULONG_MAX, + .argc = INT_MAX, .envc = INT_MAX }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ULONG_MAX, + .argc = MAX_ARG_STRINGS, .envc = MAX_ARG_STRINGS }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ULONG_MAX, + .argc = 0, .envc = MAX_ARG_STRINGS }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ULONG_MAX, + .argc = MAX_ARG_STRINGS, .envc = 0 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + /* + * On 32-bit system these argc and envc counts, while likely impossible + * to represent within the associated TASK_SIZE, could overflow the + * limit calculation, and bypass the ptr_size <= limit check. + */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ULONG_MAX, + .argc = 0x20000001, .envc = 0x20000001 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, +#ifdef CONFIG_MMU + /* Make sure a pathological bprm->p doesn't cause an overflow. */ + { { .p = sizeof(void *), .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ULONG_MAX, + .argc = 10, .envc = 10 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, +#endif + /* + * 0 rlim_stack will get raised to ARG_MAX. With 1 string pointer, + * we should see p - ARG_MAX + sizeof(void *). + */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 0, + .argc = 1, .envc = 0 }, .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - ARG_MAX + sizeof(void *)}, + /* Validate that argc is always raised to a minimum of 1. */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 0, + .argc = 0, .envc = 0 }, .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - ARG_MAX + sizeof(void *)}, + /* + * 0 rlim_stack will get raised to ARG_MAX. With pointers filling ARG_MAX, + * we should see -E2BIG. (Note argc is always raised to at least 1.) + */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 0, + .argc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *), .envc = 0 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 0, + .argc = 0, .envc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *) - 1 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 0, + .argc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *) + 1, .envc = 0 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 0, + .argc = 0, .envc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *) }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + /* And with one less, we see space for exactly 1 pointer. */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 0, + .argc = (ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *)) - 1, .envc = 0 }, + .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - sizeof(void *) }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 0, + .argc = 0, .envc = (ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *)) - 2, }, + .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - sizeof(void *) }, + /* If we raise rlim_stack / 4 to exactly ARG_MAX, nothing changes. */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ARG_MAX * 4, + .argc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *), .envc = 0 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ARG_MAX * 4, + .argc = 0, .envc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *) - 1 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ARG_MAX * 4, + .argc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *) + 1, .envc = 0 }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ARG_MAX * 4, + .argc = 0, .envc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *) }, .expected_rc = -E2BIG }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ARG_MAX * 4, + .argc = (ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *)) - 1, .envc = 0 }, + .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - sizeof(void *) }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = ARG_MAX * 4, + .argc = 0, .envc = (ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *)) - 2, }, + .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - sizeof(void *) }, + /* But raising it another pointer * 4 will provide space for 1 more pointer. */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = (ARG_MAX + sizeof(void *)) * 4, + .argc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *), .envc = 0 }, + .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - sizeof(void *) }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = (ARG_MAX + sizeof(void *)) * 4, + .argc = 0, .envc = ARG_MAX / sizeof(void *) - 1 }, + .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - sizeof(void *) }, + /* Raising rlim_stack / 4 to _STK_LIM / 4 * 3 will see more space. */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 4 * (_STK_LIM / 4 * 3), + .argc = 0, .envc = 0 }, + .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - (_STK_LIM / 4 * 3) + sizeof(void *) }, + /* But raising it any further will see no increase. */ + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 4 * (_STK_LIM / 4 * 3 + sizeof(void *)), + .argc = 0, .envc = 0 }, + .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - (_STK_LIM / 4 * 3) + sizeof(void *) }, + { { .p = ULONG_MAX, .rlim_stack.rlim_cur = 4 * _STK_LIM, + .argc = 0, .envc = 0 }, + .expected_argmin = ULONG_MAX - (_STK_LIM / 4 * 3) + sizeof(void *) }, +}; + +static void exec_test_bprm_stack_limits(struct kunit *test) +{ + /* Double-check the constants. */ + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, _STK_LIM, SZ_8M); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ARG_MAX, 32 * SZ_4K); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, MAX_ARG_STRINGS, 0x7FFFFFFF); + + for (int i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(bprm_stack_limits_results); i++) { + const struct bprm_stack_limits_result *result = &bprm_stack_limits_results[i]; + struct linux_binprm bprm = result->bprm; + int rc; + + rc = bprm_stack_limits(&bprm); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, rc, result->expected_rc, "on loop %d", i); +#ifdef CONFIG_MMU + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, bprm.argmin, result->expected_argmin, "on loop %d", i); +#endif + } +} + +static struct kunit_case exec_test_cases[] = { + KUNIT_CASE(exec_test_bprm_stack_limits), + {}, +}; + +static struct kunit_suite exec_test_suite = { + .name = "exec", + .test_cases = exec_test_cases, +}; + +kunit_test_suite(exec_test_suite); -- cgit v1.3.1