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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 07:26:22 -0700 From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> Cc: Vito Caputo <vcaputo@...garu.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>, Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Kenta.Tada@...y.com" <Kenta.Tada@...y.com>, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>, Michael Weiß <michael.weiss@...ec.fraunhofer.de>, Anand K Mistry <amistry@...gle.com>, Alexey Gladkov <legion@...nel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@...onical.com>, Ohhoon Kwon <ohoono.kwon@...sung.com>, Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>, YiFei Zhu <yifeifz2@...inois.edu>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: Disable /proc/$pid/wchan On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 02:54:24PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 06:16:16PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 05:22:30PM -0700, Vito Caputo wrote: > > > Instead of unwinding stacks maybe the kernel should be sticking an > > > entrypoint address in the current task struct for get_wchan() to > > > access, whenever userspace enters the kernel? > > > > wchan is supposed to show where the kernel is at the instant the > > get_wchan() happens. (i.e. recording it at syscall entry would just > > always show syscall entry.) > > It's supposed to show where a blocked task is blocked; the "wait > channel". > > I'd wanted to remove get_wchan since it requires cross-task stack > walking, which is generally painful. Right -- this is the "fragile" part I'm worried about. > We could instead have the scheduler entrypoints snapshot their caller > into a field in task_struct. If there are sufficiently few callers, that > could be an inline wrapper that passes a __func__ string. Otherwise, we > still need to symbolize. Hmm. Does PREEMPT break this? Can we actually use __builtin_return_address(0) in __schedule? -- Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists