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:	Fri, 31 Jul 2015 07:01:07 -0700
From:	tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov <tipbot@...or.com>
To:	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, hpa@...or.com,
	panand@...hat.com, luto@...capital.net, arapov@...il.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	oleg@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: [tip:perf/core] uprobes/x86: Make arch_uretprobe_is_alive(
 RP_CHECK_CALL) more clever

Commit-ID:  db087ef69a2b155ae001665bf0b3806abde7ee34
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/db087ef69a2b155ae001665bf0b3806abde7ee34
Author:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
AuthorDate: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 15:40:28 +0200
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CommitDate: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 10:38:06 +0200

uprobes/x86: Make arch_uretprobe_is_alive(RP_CHECK_CALL) more clever

The previous change documents that cleanup_return_instances()
can't always detect the dead frames, the stack can grow. But
there is one special case which imho worth fixing:
arch_uretprobe_is_alive() can return true when the stack didn't
actually grow, but the next "call" insn uses the already
invalidated frame.

Test-case:

	#include <stdio.h>
	#include <setjmp.h>

	jmp_buf jmp;
	int nr = 1024;

	void func_2(void)
	{
		if (--nr == 0)
			return;
		longjmp(jmp, 1);
	}

	void func_1(void)
	{
		setjmp(jmp);
		func_2();
	}

	int main(void)
	{
		func_1();
		return 0;
	}

If you ret-probe func_1() and func_2() prepare_uretprobe() hits
the MAX_URETPROBE_DEPTH limit and "return" from func_2() is not
reported.

When we know that the new call is not chained, we can do the
more strict check. In this case "sp" points to the new ret-addr,
so every frame which uses the same "sp" must be dead. The only
complication is that arch_uretprobe_is_alive() needs to know was
it chained or not, so we add the new RP_CHECK_CHAIN_CALL enum
and change prepare_uretprobe() to pass RP_CHECK_CALL only if
!chained.

Note: arch_uretprobe_is_alive() could also re-read *sp and check
if this word is still trampoline_vaddr. This could obviously
improve the logic, but I would like to avoid another
copy_from_user() especially in the case when we can't avoid the
false "alive == T" positives.

Tested-by: Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Anton Arapov <arapov@...il.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150721134028.GA4786@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c |  5 ++++-
 include/linux/uprobes.h   |  1 +
 kernel/events/uprobes.c   | 14 +++++++-------
 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c b/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
index acf8b90..bf4db6e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
@@ -989,5 +989,8 @@ arch_uretprobe_hijack_return_addr(unsigned long trampoline_vaddr, struct pt_regs
 bool arch_uretprobe_is_alive(struct return_instance *ret, enum rp_check ctx,
 				struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
-	return regs->sp <= ret->stack;
+	if (ctx == RP_CHECK_CALL) /* sp was just decremented by "call" insn */
+		return regs->sp < ret->stack;
+	else
+		return regs->sp <= ret->stack;
 }
diff --git a/include/linux/uprobes.h b/include/linux/uprobes.h
index c0a5402..0bdc72f 100644
--- a/include/linux/uprobes.h
+++ b/include/linux/uprobes.h
@@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct return_instance {
 
 enum rp_check {
 	RP_CHECK_CALL,
+	RP_CHECK_CHAIN_CALL,
 	RP_CHECK_RET,
 };
 
diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
index df5661a..0f370ef 100644
--- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
@@ -1511,10 +1511,11 @@ static unsigned long get_trampoline_vaddr(void)
 	return trampoline_vaddr;
 }
 
-static void cleanup_return_instances(struct uprobe_task *utask, struct pt_regs *regs)
+static void cleanup_return_instances(struct uprobe_task *utask, bool chained,
+					struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
 	struct return_instance *ri = utask->return_instances;
-	enum rp_check ctx = RP_CHECK_CALL;
+	enum rp_check ctx = chained ? RP_CHECK_CHAIN_CALL : RP_CHECK_CALL;
 
 	while (ri && !arch_uretprobe_is_alive(ri, ctx, regs)) {
 		ri = free_ret_instance(ri);
@@ -1528,7 +1529,7 @@ static void prepare_uretprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 	struct return_instance *ri;
 	struct uprobe_task *utask;
 	unsigned long orig_ret_vaddr, trampoline_vaddr;
-	bool chained = false;
+	bool chained;
 
 	if (!get_xol_area())
 		return;
@@ -1554,14 +1555,15 @@ static void prepare_uretprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 		goto fail;
 
 	/* drop the entries invalidated by longjmp() */
-	cleanup_return_instances(utask, regs);
+	chained = (orig_ret_vaddr == trampoline_vaddr);
+	cleanup_return_instances(utask, chained, regs);
 
 	/*
 	 * We don't want to keep trampoline address in stack, rather keep the
 	 * original return address of first caller thru all the consequent
 	 * instances. This also makes breakpoint unwrapping easier.
 	 */
-	if (orig_ret_vaddr == trampoline_vaddr) {
+	if (chained) {
 		if (!utask->return_instances) {
 			/*
 			 * This situation is not possible. Likely we have an
@@ -1570,8 +1572,6 @@ static void prepare_uretprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 			uprobe_warn(current, "handle tail call");
 			goto fail;
 		}
-
-		chained = true;
 		orig_ret_vaddr = utask->return_instances->orig_ret_vaddr;
 	}
 
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ