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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 23:17:28 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>, Anton Arapov <aarapov@...hat.com>, David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>, Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>, Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] uprobes/tracing: uprobe_perf_open() forgets to handle the error from uprobe_apply() On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:58:30 +0200 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote: > uprobe_perf_open()->uprobe_apply() can fail, but this error is wrongly > ignored. Change uprobe_perf_open() to do uprobe_perf_close() and return > the error code in this case. > > Change uprobe_perf_close() to propogate the error from uprobe_apply() > as well, although it should not fail. > > The patch looks more complicated because it moves uprobe_perf_close() > up to make it visible to uprobe_perf_open(). > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> > --- > kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------- > 1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c > index 930e514..9aad3e2 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c > @@ -1003,56 +1003,60 @@ uprobe_filter_event(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct perf_event *event) > return __uprobe_perf_filter(&tu->filter, event->hw.tp_target->mm); > } > > -static int uprobe_perf_open(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct perf_event *event) > +static int uprobe_perf_close(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct perf_event *event) Egad, this confused the heck out of me. I didn't notice the swap in functions and was wondering what you were doing. I didn't realize this is what you meant by moving the uprobe_perf_close() up. I was thinking you moved the call up or something, not the function itself physically in the file. /me tries to continue dazed and confused. > { > bool done; > > write_lock(&tu->filter.rwlock); > if (event->hw.tp_target) { > - /* > - * event->parent != NULL means copy_process(), we can avoid > - * uprobe_apply(). current->mm must be probed and we can rely > - * on dup_mmap() which preserves the already installed bp's. > - * > - * attr.enable_on_exec means that exec/mmap will install the > - * breakpoints we need. > - */ > + list_del(&event->hw.tp_list); > done = tu->filter.nr_systemwide || > - event->parent || event->attr.enable_on_exec || > + (event->hw.tp_target->flags & PF_EXITING) || > uprobe_filter_event(tu, event); > - list_add(&event->hw.tp_list, &tu->filter.perf_events); > } else { > + tu->filter.nr_systemwide--; > done = tu->filter.nr_systemwide; > - tu->filter.nr_systemwide++; > } > write_unlock(&tu->filter.rwlock); > > if (!done) > - uprobe_apply(tu->inode, tu->offset, &tu->consumer, true); > + return uprobe_apply(tu->inode, tu->offset, &tu->consumer, false); > > return 0; > } > > -static int uprobe_perf_close(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct perf_event *event) > +static int uprobe_perf_open(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct perf_event *event) > { > bool done; > + int err; > > write_lock(&tu->filter.rwlock); > if (event->hw.tp_target) { > - list_del(&event->hw.tp_list); > + /* > + * event->parent != NULL means copy_process(), we can avoid > + * uprobe_apply(). current->mm must be probed and we can rely > + * on dup_mmap() which preserves the already installed bp's. > + * > + * attr.enable_on_exec means that exec/mmap will install the > + * breakpoints we need. > + */ > done = tu->filter.nr_systemwide || > - (event->hw.tp_target->flags & PF_EXITING) || > + event->parent || event->attr.enable_on_exec || > uprobe_filter_event(tu, event); > + list_add(&event->hw.tp_list, &tu->filter.perf_events); > } else { > - tu->filter.nr_systemwide--; > done = tu->filter.nr_systemwide; > + tu->filter.nr_systemwide++; > } > write_unlock(&tu->filter.rwlock); > > - if (!done) > - uprobe_apply(tu->inode, tu->offset, &tu->consumer, false); > - > - return 0; > + err = 0; > + if (!done) { > + err = uprobe_apply(tu->inode, tu->offset, &tu->consumer, true); > + if (err) > + uprobe_perf_close(tu, event); > + } > + return err; You can add by Acked-by, but next time, please make this into two patches. One to do the move, the other to do the change. Thanks! -- Steve > } > > static bool uprobe_perf_filter(struct uprobe_consumer *uc, -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists