linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3][RFC] tracing/kprobes: prevent jprobes from crashing function graph tracer

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 2 Nov 2009 21:22:04 +0100
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3][RFC] tracing/kprobes: prevent jprobes from crashing
	function graph tracer

On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 10:02:23AM -0500, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> I'm not sure I've well understood how is performed the call to the jprobe
>> handler.
>> But if I understand well we have:
>>
>> 	func() {
>> 		int3() {
>> 			jprobe_handler() {
>> 				(-)
>> 				set ip after iret to user_handler()
>> 			}
>> 		}
>> 		user_handler() {
>> 			jprobe_return() {
>> 				(+)
>> 				int3() {
>> 					set ip after iret to func+...()
>> 				}
>> 			       |
>> 			       |
>> 			       |
>>                  <--------------
>>                  (execute the rest of func())
>> 	}
>>
>> If we replace (-) with pause_graph_tracing() and (+) with
>> unpause_graph_tracing(), this should do the trick...I hope.
>
> I'm not so sure about pause_graph_tracing(), however, it seems that
> int3() and jprobe_handler() already pushed on the stack of the
> func graph tracer at (-). If it's true, where are those entries
> popped up?
>


pause_graph_tracing() will disable the tracing for the current task
but it won't disable the address pop from stack.

If the above jprobe scheme is right, the scenario will be:

      func() {
              /* push func ret */
              int3() {
                      /* push do_trap ret */
                      jprobe_handler() {
                              /* push jprobe_handler ret */
                              pause_graph_tracing();
                              set ip after iret to user_handler()
                      } /* pop jprobe_handler ret */
              } /* pop do_trap ret */
              user_handler() {
                      jprobe_return() {
                              unpause_graph_tracing()
                              int3() {
                                     /* push do_trap ret */
                                      set ip after iret to func+...()
                              } /* pop do_trap ret */
                             |
                             |
                             |
               <--------------
               (execute the rest of func())
      } /* pop func ret */


Hmm?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/