netdev - Re: FAILED unresolved symbol vfs_truncate on arm64 with LLVM

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:   Tue, 9 Feb 2021 17:02:57 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        Veronika Kabatova <vkabatov@...hat.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
        Daniel Kiss <daniel.kiss@....com>
Subject: Re: FAILED unresolved symbol vfs_truncate on arm64 with LLVM

On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 12:09:31PM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:06 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 05:13:42PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 04:09:36PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > >
> > > SNIP
> > >
> > > > > > > >                 DW_AT_prototyped        (true)
> > > > > > > >                 DW_AT_type      (0x01cfdfe4 "long int")
> > > > > > > >                 DW_AT_external  (true)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ok, the problem appears to be not in DWARF, but in mcount_loc data.
> > > > > > > vfs_truncate's address is not recorded as ftrace-attachable, and thus
> > > > > > > pahole ignores it. I don't know why this happens and it's quite
> > > > > > > strange, given vfs_truncate is just a normal global function.
> > > > >
> > > > > right, I can't see it in mcount adresses.. but it begins with instructions
> > > > > that appears to be nops, which would suggest it's traceable
> > > > >
> > > > >   ffff80001031f430 <vfs_truncate>:
> > > > >   ffff80001031f430: 5f 24 03 d5   hint    #34
> > > > >   ffff80001031f434: 1f 20 03 d5   nop
> > > > >   ffff80001031f438: 1f 20 03 d5   nop
> > > > >   ffff80001031f43c: 3f 23 03 d5   hint    #25
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'd like to understand this issue before we try to fix it, but there
> > > > > > > is at least one improvement we can make: pahole should check ftrace
> > > > > > > addresses only for static functions, not the global ones (global ones
> > > > > > > should be always attachable, unless they are special, e.g., notrace
> > > > > > > and stuff). We can easily check that by looking at the corresponding
> > > > > > > symbol. But I'd like to verify that vfs_truncate is ftrace-attachable
> > > >
> > > > I'm still trying to build the kernel.. however ;-)
> > >
> > > I finally reproduced.. however arm's not using mcount_loc
> > > but some other special section.. so it's new mess for me
> >
> > so ftrace data actualy has vfs_truncate address but with extra 4 bytes:
> >
> >         ffff80001031f434
> >
> > real vfs_truncate address:
> >
> >         ffff80001031f430 g     F .text  0000000000000168 vfs_truncate
> >
> > vfs_truncate disasm:
> >
> >         ffff80001031f430 <vfs_truncate>:
> >         ffff80001031f430: 5f 24 03 d5   hint    #34
> >         ffff80001031f434: 1f 20 03 d5   nop
> >         ffff80001031f438: 1f 20 03 d5   nop
> >         ffff80001031f43c: 3f 23 03 d5   hint    #25
> >
> > thats why we don't match it in pahole.. I checked few other functions
> > and some have the same problem and some match the function boundary
> >
> > those that match don't have that first hint instrucion, like:
> >
> >         ffff800010321e40 <do_faccessat>:
> >         ffff800010321e40: 1f 20 03 d5   nop
> >         ffff800010321e44: 1f 20 03 d5   nop
> >         ffff800010321e48: 3f 23 03 d5   hint    #25
> >
> > any hints about hint instructions? ;-)
> 
> aarch64 makes *some* newer instructions reuse the "hint" ie "nop"
> encoding space to make software backwards compatible on older hardware
> that doesn't support such instructions.  Is this BTI, perhaps? (The
> function is perhaps the destination of an indirect call?)

It seems like it. The issue is not reproducible when
CONFIG_ARM64_BTI_KERNEL is not set.

Cheers,
Nathan